Death Penalty

Where no two people are likely to agree.
User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:01 pm

moth1ne wrote:The death penalty is the same poor moral lesson we get from the OT: an eye for an eye. It is not a moral principle and if the state kills an innocent person then it is cold-blooded murder. How is it not? That's what Rob has failed to show throughout this thread.


Rob hasn't tried. Rob thinks month1ne and others are welcome to their own individual senses of morality.
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:12 pm

Rob Lister wrote:
moth1ne wrote:The death penalty is the same poor moral lesson we get from the OT: an eye for an eye. It is not a moral principle and if the state kills an innocent person then it is cold-blooded murder. How is it not? That's what Rob has failed to show throughout this thread.


Rob hasn't tried. Rob thinks month1ne and others are welcome to their own individual senses of morality.

You are missing my point. Morality is an individual judgement, but murder is murder. You cannot change the definition between when the state does it and when an individual does it. Major finds it immoral to murder an innocent person and so do I. If you do not then you are a sociopath.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

User avatar
ALF
Poster
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:21 pm
Location: The planet Melmac

Re: Death Penalty

Post by ALF » Sun Dec 30, 2012 8:53 pm

One aspect of the death penalty issue I brought up, in the poem of the OP, is the way we treat physical illness differently from mental illness. Curious that nobody picked up on it yet.

Of course, you have to admit that guilty serial killers have sick minds.

Or would you call it a healthy mind?

Unless you want to drag religion into the debate and call them 'evil' -- without knowing how to define the concept?

We were all born with some genetic inheritance and some environment -- these 2 shaped us through life and are responsible for our actions.

So, if we accept that some of us have sick, diseased minds, why do we treat them (by murder) differently than we treat mental patients in a hospital who have a different mental illness not threatening anybody?
Nothing.....just screaming....

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:18 pm

ALF wrote:So, if we accept that some of us have sick, diseased minds, why do we treat them (by murder) differently than we treat mental patients in a hospital who have a different mental illness not threatening anybody?

I'm sure you've heard the defense of not being mentally able to be responsible for your crimes? If it is determined that you truly suffer from a mental condition that could lead to some violent action and do so, it simply means that they do suffer from a mental illness but no one ever did anything about it prior to the crime. Thus the judgment takes that into account and they are more likely go to a mental institution for therapy rather than jail.

There have been cases of diagnosed dissociative identity disorder or schizophrenia in people that are then ruled not responsible for their actions.

I dunno about the rest of your post. You seem to be asking a big question in the shortest way possible. You've posted the question, but haven't given your feelings on the subject.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12483
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Major Malfunction » Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:44 pm

Sorry, Moth.

I'm saying murder is murder, and murder is wrong.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:49 pm

moth1ne wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:
moth1ne wrote:The death penalty is the same poor moral lesson we get from the OT: an eye for an eye. It is not a moral principle and if the state kills an innocent person then it is cold-blooded murder. How is it not? That's what Rob has failed to show throughout this thread.


Rob hasn't tried. Rob thinks month1ne and others are welcome to their own individual senses of morality.

You are missing my point. Morality is an individual judgement, but murder is murder. You cannot change the definition between when the state does it and when an individual does it. Major finds it immoral to murder an innocent person and so do I. If you do not then you are a sociopath.

To Rob:
So then if that state is sociopathic then by its own rule of law shouldn't it be put to death? By your logic? For killing innocent people and not considering it immoral to do so.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:57 pm

Major Malfunction wrote:Sorry, Moth.

I'm saying murder is murder, and murder is wrong.

Oh I totally agree with you, but the OP is attempting to make your argument sound as though it is an appeal to emotion, which it is not. Murder is murder is not an emotional argument. The OP is choosing to have an alternate definition of murder by the state vs. murder by an individual and I am pointing out that that is illogical. Murder is murder, doesn't matter who does it. If someone murders an innocent person and doesn't see it as an immoral act then that person is a sociopath. When you say you believe murder is wrong you are positing that you are not a sociopath. Right?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:55 pm

moth1ne wrote:So then if that state is sociopathic then by its own rule of law shouldn't it be put to death?


The rule of law provides for the conditions under which the premeditated execution of others is lawful. One such law provides for the death penalty.

If you wish to discuss it in terms of the rule of law--like the way Major Mal did without understanding what he was writing--you cannot exclude the actual rules of those laws from the terms of the discussion.

That's what the logic dictates.

It doesn't dictate that the law makes sense; i.e. be logical. The law is an ass1,2, after all.

So, if you want to discuss the morality of the death penalty, feel free. I'll be for it one day and again' it the next. Today I am neither, for it is my moral day of rest.

If OTOH you want to discuss the logic of the death penalty, I'll probably join in any ol' day. But you don't do logic, so I suppose that's that.



footnotes
1 Ere he shall lose an eye for such a trifle... For doing deeds of nature! I'm ashamed. The law is such an ass.--Chapman, Revenge for Honour, 1654 [disputably]

2 "If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is an ass - an idiot". --Dickens, Oliver Twist, 1838.
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:18 am

Rob Lister wrote:
moth1ne wrote:So then if that state is sociopathic then by its own rule of law shouldn't it be put to death?


The rule of law provides for the conditions under which the premeditated execution of others is lawful. One such law provides for the death penalty.

If you wish to discuss it in terms of the rule of law--like the way Major Mal did without understanding what he was writing--you cannot exclude the actual rules of those laws from the terms of the discussion.

That's what the logic dictates.

It doesn't dictate that the law makes sense; i.e. be logical. The law is an ass1,2, after all.

So, if you want to discuss the morality of the death penalty, feel free. I'll be for it one day and again' it the next. Today I am neither, for it is my moral day of rest.

If OTOH you want to discuss the logic of the death penalty, I'll probably join in any ol' day. But you don't do logic, so I suppose that's that.



footnotes
1 Ere he shall lose an eye for such a trifle... For doing deeds of nature! I'm ashamed. The law is such an ass.--Chapman, Revenge for Honour, 1654 [disputably]

2 "If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is an ass - an idiot". --Dickens, Oliver Twist, 1838.

Well when you claim that Major is making an appeal to emotion by discussing the morality of murder then that is where the discussion will go. This was the topic of the thread. Furthermore, it is not fallacious to discuss the moral system in terms of the death penalty. The death penalty was put into place as a means to vindicate a certain moral principle: an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
The rule of law provides for the conditions under which the premeditated execution of others is lawful. One such law provides for the death penalty.

Execution of others is lawful? Is the law not based around a moral system? A system of practiced human empathy? So on what grounds is it not okay to say "murder is wrong" when you claim that "murder is lawful"?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:47 am

moth1ne wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:
moth1ne wrote:So then if that state is sociopathic then by its own rule of law shouldn't it be put to death?


The rule of law provides for the conditions under which the premeditated execution of others is lawful. One such law provides for the death penalty.

If you wish to discuss it in terms of the rule of law--like the way Major Mal did without understanding what he was writing--you cannot exclude the actual rules of those laws from the terms of the discussion.

That's what the logic dictates.

It doesn't dictate that the law makes sense; i.e. be logical. The law is an ass1,2, after all.

So, if you want to discuss the morality of the death penalty, feel free. I'll be for it one day and again' it the next. Today I am neither, for it is my moral day of rest.

If OTOH you want to discuss the logic of the death penalty, I'll probably join in any ol' day. But you don't do logic, so I suppose that's that.



footnotes
1 Ere he shall lose an eye for such a trifle... For doing deeds of nature! I'm ashamed. The law is such an ass.--Chapman, Revenge for Honour, 1654 [disputably]

2 "If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is an ass - an idiot". --Dickens, Oliver Twist, 1838.


Execution of others is lawful?


Indisputably in certain states and at the federal level. It seems a little silly that you'd ask that given the tread topic.

Is the law not based around a moral system? A system of practiced human empathy?


You tell me. No doubt that every law ever written has had some sort of moral justification argued. Are all laws therefore moral? Are all morals equal?

So on what grounds is it not okay to say "murder is wrong" when you claim that "murder is lawful"?


I claim the death penalty is lawful because that is a fact. I expressed my fluctuating opinion of the morality of it in post 14.

As I said, it is perfectly okay to say murder is immoral, but unless it is expressed as opinion, it is meaningless unless you define 'moral'

Can you define 'morality' for us in objective terms?
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:23 am

Rob Lister wrote:Can you define 'morality' for us in objective terms?

Moral: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moral

Seems like an objective definition to me. It is up to us as a societal species to determine what we consider moral. I think it is safe to say that most rational and mentally healthy human beings would say that "murder is immoral or wrong". You cannot be entirely objective when discussing the morality of the death penalty or the law that permits it. You asked,
Are all laws therefore moral?

Well I would assume that the laws our society has in place are to benefit the human condition and yet many laws are immoral. However, this only shows that there is an inherent bias in the ways our laws are written that look to benefit a certain demographic more than others (I.E. Gay marriage is banned in certain states).

When you are arguing that certain people "need to die" you are pressing a personal opinion and therefor your stance on the issue is no more logical then the opinion that "murder is wrong". But the main issue is that murder is murder no matter which entity commits it. If the state executes an innocent person (regardless of the flaws of the justice system) it is still murder. If an individual person kills an innocent person it is still murder. There is no difference even if you call it lawful, there is NO DIFFERENCE. The moral judgement will always be on an individual level.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:02 am

moth1ne wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:Can you define 'morality' for us in objective terms?

Moral: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moral

Seems like an objective definition to me. It is up to us as a societal species to determine what we consider moral. I think it is safe to say that most rational and mentally healthy human beings would say that "murder is immoral or wrong".


Of course they would. And a majority of those would also say the death penalty was right. Now what?
Anyway, you pointed to a definition that used subjective terms 'right' and 'wrong'. Try again.

You cannot be entirely objective when discussing the morality of the death penalty or the law that permits it.


Don't project. Just because you get wrapped around a subjective axle doesn't mean I do.

When you are arguing that certain people "need to die" you are pressing a personal opinion and therefor your stance on the issue is no more logical then the opinion that "murder is wrong".


Indeed, it was my opinion, and I stated it in the context of such. I didn't call it right. I didn't call it wrong. I didn't call it murder. I called it needful. You cannot know if my stance on it is logical or not. There's not enough data points (at least in that post). That's what Alf was all pissed about. He didn't read well either.
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12483
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Major Malfunction » Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:58 am

moth1ne wrote:When you say you believe murder is wrong you are positing that you are not a sociopath. Right?

Actually, I am a sociopath. I generally hate people, because most of them are {!#%@}. I don't go around telling it to their faces, tho'. That would make my life harder than it needs to be.

I'm well aware of what Rob is doing. You don't need to defend me, Moth. I'm not going anywhere.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:39 am

Major Malfunction wrote:
moth1ne wrote:When you say you believe murder is wrong you are positing that you are not a sociopath. Right?

Actually, I am a sociopath. I generally hate people, because most of them are {!#%@}. I don't go around telling it to their faces, tho'. That would make my life harder than it needs to be.

I'm well aware of what Rob is doing. You don't need to defend me, Moth. I'm not going anywhere.

haha. fair nuff.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: Death Penalty

Post by nmblum88 » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:51 am

Major Malfunction wrote:
moth1ne wrote:When you say you believe murder is wrong you are positing that you are not a sociopath. Right?

Actually, I am a sociopath. I generally hate people, because most of them are {!#%@}. I don't go around telling it to their faces, tho'. That would make my life harder than it needs to be.

I'm well aware of what Rob is doing. You don't need to defend me, Moth. I'm not going anywhere.



Are you Jim Jefferies, incognito?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJ-_OTvsqo
NMB
Skepticism:
" Norma, you poor sad lonely alcoholic. You entire life is devoted to interrupting other people's posts on this forum, regardless of the topic, to tell them what's wrong with them. The irony is, here you are doing it again, with this very post.
Your fanciful card games, movie sojourns and exciting overseas trips, that all take place within the four walls of an aged care retirement home, do not suggest your own children offered you the care, I gave my parents."

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:58 am

Rob Lister wrote:Indeed, it was my opinion, and I stated it in the context of such. I didn't call it right. I didn't call it wrong. I didn't call it murder. I called it needful. You cannot know if my stance on it is logical or not. There's not enough data points (at least in that post). That's what Alf was all pissed about. He didn't read well either.

I think you've made enough points in your other posts for your argument to sound illogical. "Some people need to die" is just one example. You want to ignore the moral implication of the argument on the grounds of lawfulness which is just not possible in the debate over the death penalty.
And a majority of those would also say the death penalty was right. Now what?
Anyway, you pointed to a definition that used subjective terms 'right' and 'wrong'. Try again.

Majority? That's a pretty big assumption...
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

User avatar
moth1ne
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1704
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 7:41 pm
Custom Title: theyscanhearsmythots
Location: Washington

Re: Death Penalty

Post by moth1ne » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:59 am

nmblum wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:
moth1ne wrote:When you say you believe murder is wrong you are positing that you are not a sociopath. Right?

Actually, I am a sociopath. I generally hate people, because most of them are {!#%@}. I don't go around telling it to their faces, tho'. That would make my life harder than it needs to be.

I'm well aware of what Rob is doing. You don't need to defend me, Moth. I'm not going anywhere.



Are you Jim Jefferies, incognito?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJ-_OTvsqo
NMB

Jim Jefferies is one funny... bloat? Is that what you Aussies say?
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -Carl Sagan, The Demon Haunted World

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12483
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Major Malfunction » Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:37 am

nmblum wrote:Are you Jim Jefferies, incognito?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZJ-_OTvsqo
NMB

No. But if I were a stand-up comedian I'd probably be something like him. Hilarious.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Tue Jan 01, 2013 4:49 pm

Today's a tough day for me because being Tuesday, I can't make an emotional argument for the Death Penalty. So? Well, I happened across an article showing a roundup of photos for 2012. One such photo:

Image
The Oslo District Court yesterday ruled that fascist mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik was sane and handed down the maximum sentence of 21 years imprisonment for his twin terrorist attacks on July 22, 2011. A mass shooting of social democratic youth on the island of Utoeya and an earlier car bomb led to the deaths of 77.


If this were yesterday or tomorrow, I might recommend they publicly burn him at a stake. But I can't do that today. Today, the best I can do is ask myself how much it is going to cost to keep this ... person confined for the next 21 years. He may not actually get out in 21 years; in theory they can hold him indefinitely. They probably will.

Charlie
Image
In the 1972 case California v. Anderson, the California death penalty was abolished.
Any prisoner now under a sentence of death ... may file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the superior court inviting that court to modify its judgment to provide for the appropriate alternative punishment of life imprisonment or life imprisonment without possibility of parole specified by statute for the crime for which he was sentenced to death."

So, the gentleman above became eligible for parole only seven years conviction. There was no way in hell they were ever going to let him out, though. He'll die in prison. But I think mostly because he remained the nutcase he was and the notoriety of the case in general. He said in interviews that he liked prison; everything a man needs; that it is his home. Go figure. Of course, by the end of 1990, roughly forty were walking the street committing a rape here, a murder there, but really in keeping with the recidivism rate of parolees in general. The parole board considered these fine folks eligible to walk our streets. They did about as good a job in that consideration as they do in general. They were officially stamped safe so long as they check in occasionally with someone.

So, the questions posed:
1) Is there any possible crime for which death should be the punishment?
2) Should punishment play any role in our judicial system absent evidence it would deter crime?
3) Is life in prison better than death?
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:02 pm

Rob Lister wrote:2) Should punishment play any role in our judicial system absent evidence it would deter crime?

This has been answered, by me, earlier in the thread.

Rob Lister wrote:3) Is life in prison better than death?

I live in a society that has totally abolished the death penalty quite awhile ago. But, I'm more than happy to be a hypocrite and say I'd prefer death to a life sentence. I'm a free spirit and being trapped like that is a fate worse than death. That would truly truly be the worst form of punishment for a guy like me.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
ALF
Poster
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:21 pm
Location: The planet Melmac

Re: Death Penalty

Post by ALF » Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:33 pm

Hex wrote:I live in a society that has totally abolished the death penalty quite awhile ago. But, I'm more than happy to be a hypocrite and say I'd prefer death to a life sentence. I'm a free spirit and being trapped like that is a fate worse than death. That would truly truly be the worst form of punishment for a guy like me.


The law should be changed so that euthanasia would be available for dangerous criminals (who would merit the death sentence) -- AT THEIR REQUEST!
Nothing.....just screaming....

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:42 pm

ALF wrote:The law should be changed so that euthanasia would be available for dangerous criminals (who would merit the death sentence) -- AT THEIR REQUEST!

Problem is there are a couple of sticking points. Any kind of "euthanasia" would still not be considered any different than death by the state, that represent the people, which would make society a murderer. There will be plenty of groups out there still against that. If it is determined that the murderer is declared mentally incapable, the argument would be that that individual person doesn't have the mental capacity to determine his own fate.

I may qualify for both examples so I'd be doubly screwed. So, suicide for me!
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:44 pm

Hex wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:2) Should punishment play any role in our judicial system absent evidence it would deter crime?

This has been answered, by me, earlier in the thread.


I don't find an answer by you to that question in this thread. Can you repeat it or point to it? What is in the logical interest of the state in terms of punishment (deterrence aspect withstanding)?

Hex wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:3) Is life in prison better than death?

I live in a society that has totally abolished the death penalty quite awhile ago. But, I'm more than happy to be a hypocrite and say I'd prefer death to a life sentence. I'm a free spirit and being trapped like that is a fate worse than death. That would truly truly be the worst form of punishment for a guy like me.


Should we provide prisoners that have no hope of release the means by which they can end it all?
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
ALF
Poster
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:21 pm
Location: The planet Melmac

Re: Death Penalty

Post by ALF » Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:49 pm

Hex wrote:
ALF wrote:The law should be changed so that euthanasia would be available for dangerous criminals (who would merit the death sentence) -- AT THEIR REQUEST!

Problem is there are a couple of sticking points. Any kind of "euthanasia" would still not be considered any different than death by the state, that represent the people, which would make society a murderer.


As I said in the "Euthanasia" thread -- Euthanasia should be made legal for anyone requesting it, while the request is made with a sound mind. The state has no right to tell people when and how they should die and, if staying alive would cause unbearable suffering for the person (as in the case of terminal disease or, in this case, a life-long prison sentence) than the compassionate and merciful thing is to help them end their life.
Nothing.....just screaming....

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:23 pm

Rob Lister wrote:I don't find an answer by you to that question in this thread. Can you repeat it or point to it? What is in the logical interest of the state in terms of punishment (deterrence aspect withstanding)?


Sure. Here ya' go.

Rob Lister wrote:Should we provide prisoners that have no hope of release the means by which they can end it all?

An ethical question I'm really not educated enough to answer. My own opinions would vary greatly. For instance a child molester that molests and kills a child should be forced to live out their days with a picture of the child they killed mounted in their cell and left in solitary confinement. A 16 year old kid that killed someone should go to jail but have an opportunity for parole later in life. Provided they enthusiastically participate in rehabilitation programs.

In the end of a series of protocols were set up, psychological etc., to determine if assisted suicide is something that could be done, then I feel it transcends murder and society is on the hook for assisted suicide. And, this issue is still as contentious as murdering inmates.

What I'm saying is I don't have the magic answer.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:58 pm

Hex wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:I don't find an answer by you to that question in this thread. Can you repeat it or point to it? What is in the logical interest of the state in terms of punishment (deterrence aspect withstanding)?


Sure. Here ya' go.


I enjoy reading you Hex. I thought I had missed something. I find that the only thing in that post that even tangentially touched on the question was:

Hex wrote:One thing I do believe is that giving the courts the ability to kill criminals does not deter other criminals from killing.


The question was ...
2) Should punishment play any role in our judicial system absent evidence it would deter crime?


So I'm thinking you may have misread the question. Having reread it, did you have a reply?
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9769
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Poodle » Wed Jan 02, 2013 1:02 am

Misquoting Dickens should be a capital offence.

"If the law supposes that ... the law is a ass - a idiot."

Not "an ass".

Really!

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Wed Jan 02, 2013 11:15 am

Rob Lister wrote:
2) Should punishment play any role in our judicial system absent evidence it would deter crime?


So I'm thinking you may have misread the question. Having reread it, did you have a reply?

Right after I posted, it occurred to me that maybe I misread your question. Laziness and life prevented me from exploring it myself. I figured you'd tell me so.

The process of determining what kind of punishment, to an individual, is based on what that individual had done and what laws have been passed in dealing with those crimes. By no means should laws or punishment should reflect what people may think would deter crime. They seem like two different subjects that should never be considered when making laws. The best example I can think of, of just how horribly wrong things can go when considering laws that are suppose to deter a certain crime is the war on drugs.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Thu Jan 03, 2013 12:36 am

Hex wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:
2) Should punishment play any role in our judicial system absent evidence it would deter crime?


So I'm thinking you may have misread the question. Having reread it, did you have a reply?

Right after I posted, it occurred to me that maybe I misread your question. Laziness and life prevented me from exploring it myself. I figured you'd tell me so.

The process of determining what kind of punishment, to an individual, is based on what that individual had done and what laws have been passed in dealing with those crimes. By no means should laws or punishment should reflect what people may think would deter crime. They seem like two different subjects that should never be considered when making laws. The best example I can think of, of just how horribly wrong things can go when considering laws that are suppose to deter a certain crime is the war on drugs.


I'm not sure how to read an answer into your response; it doesn't appear directly. This struck me:
By no means should laws or punishment should reflect what people may think would deter crime.


Minor typo stricken for the purpose of conveying how I read it.
If I'm reading that right, deterrence should not even be considered in the making of a law, much less the penalty for breaking it. Do I have that right? I think most folks--law makers especially--would make deterrence the number one priority. Why else write the law, if not for deterrence?
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

nmblum88
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7815
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 6:28 pm

Re: Death Penalty

Post by nmblum88 » Thu Jan 03, 2013 1:06 am

Poodle wrote:Misquoting Dickens should be a capital offence.

"If the law supposes that ... the law is a ass - a idiot."

Not "an ass".

Really!


Lucky you... if the offense to the wit of Dickens is the only thing that caught your eye and engaged your own ire (I assume that the suggestion of "captal offence" reflects some degree of ire).
I was thinking of the entire canon of Western literature and philosophy at which point my head seemed to explode.
I actually feel better, happier ... much less critical, more accepting, now.

NMB
Skepticism:
" Norma, you poor sad lonely alcoholic. You entire life is devoted to interrupting other people's posts on this forum, regardless of the topic, to tell them what's wrong with them. The irony is, here you are doing it again, with this very post.
Your fanciful card games, movie sojourns and exciting overseas trips, that all take place within the four walls of an aged care retirement home, do not suggest your own children offered you the care, I gave my parents."

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:05 am

By no means should laws or punishment should reflect what people may think would deter crime.


Rob Lister wrote:Minor typo stricken for the purpose of conveying how I read it.
If I'm reading that right, deterrence should not even be considered in the making of a law, much less the penalty for breaking it. Do I have that right? I think most folks--law makers especially--would make deterrence the number one priority. Why else write the law, if not for deterrence?

I'm saying it can be misguided. Making laws is a system of creating a "civilized" society. Laws have a natural by-product of deterrent. The crux of the problem becomes what I made bold. Like the war on drugs as my example. People made the law(s) about drugs with the perception that it was going to solve all the problems with drugs, otherwise why pass them? Passing harsh laws against minor drug charges has solved nothing. Putting all this money into the "war" is taking away money for preventative initiatives or helping those that want and need help. It is just filling up jails and making the government feel good about themselves and roll out a "big" drug bust occasionally to show the public how good the war is going, when in reality they are losing it. Even after all this time the government is either in total denial on how things are going or just downright refusing to fix what is broken. This "war on drugs" has been going on since the 1970's because it is "what people think". No body bothered to have a comprehensive look at the drug culture and what would be most effective. Just throw some antiquated laws at it and hope it goes away.

See how this was problem solving and not a deterrent? Subtle difference but a difference.

Hope that helped, cause I don't know how else to put it. ;)
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12483
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Major Malfunction » Thu Jan 03, 2013 6:37 am

So, Rob, let's put it this way...

If you were wearing the black hood, and knew without reasonable doubt that the person on the chopping block was innocent of the charges levied against him, because maybe you'd spent the whole night together in your bed, you'd be quite happy to swing the axe.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
ALF
Poster
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:21 pm
Location: The planet Melmac

Re: Death Penalty

Post by ALF » Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:06 pm

Still no answer: Is violent antisocial behaviour (rape, murder, etc) the result of sick minds or of some kind of 'evil' that occupies some minds and not some others.

If it is a mental disease, I can understand that.

If it is an 'evil' -- where did it come from? Why does it attack some minds and not some others (we were all innocent babies once).

And, if you say it is not a sick mind -- would you want to call it healthy?
Nothing.....just screaming....

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:31 am

ALF wrote:And, if you say it is not a sick mind -- would you want to call it healthy?

Yes. But, motivations with evil intent. To deny that people can only be evil because they are mentally unbalanced, you'd have to agree that everyone was mentally unbalanced.

Police say that many physical abuse and murders happen with domestic arguments.It is hard to believe that all those examples require every one of them are mentally imbalanced and not temporarily emotionally charged.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
ALF
Poster
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:21 pm
Location: The planet Melmac

Re: Death Penalty

Post by ALF » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:02 am

Hex wrote:.It is hard to believe that all those examples require every one of them are mentally imbalanced and not temporarily emotionally charged..


OK, let's start with a simple case: serial killer. Cold blooded, rational, meticulously planned murders. No emotional charge, nothing to gain financially.

You did not answer the question I posed:

If it is an 'evil' -- where did it come from? Why does it attack some minds and not some others (we were all innocent babies once).
Nothing.....just screaming....

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9925
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Death Penalty

Post by fromthehills » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:19 am

I'm against killing people that aren't an immediate threat. Someone that is detained, and cannot cause harm to innocents is not a threat. Life in prison seems like a more appropriate sentence. And in my opinion, harsher. I don't believe that people should be killed in revenge, though. In defense of life, taking the life of a predator is justified. But I staunchly disagree with the death penalty as a punishment. Revenge killing is best left to savages.

User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:14 pm

ALF wrote:You did not answer the question I posed:

If it is an 'evil' -- where did it come from? Why does it attack some minds and not some others (we were all innocent babies once).


Perhaps the question has no answer because you didn't define 'evil'.

If evil defined as a willingness to do the thing you're asking about, then yea, it's evil, but it begs the question; circular definitions are not useful.

Q: Why is he crazy?
A: He does crazy {!#%@}!
Q: Why does he do crazy {!#%@}?
A: Because he's crazy!
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Hex
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:26 pm
Custom Title: mi malam ciuj el vi
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Hex » Sat Jan 05, 2013 2:41 am

ALF wrote:OK, let's start with a simple case: serial killer. Cold blooded, rational, meticulously planned murders. No emotional charge, nothing to gain financially.

You did not answer the question I posed:

Your asking me to go beyond my personal knowledge. I'm not a psychologist, psychiatrist or priest. I read true life crimes, but it still doesn't give me a inside look at just how psychopaths operate, except for the most minimal of knowledge. Even reading these books there are professionals that can't fully understand the mind of a psycho path so to ask me is a terribly unfair question.

Like Rob pointed out, it is difficult to answer this question when you've made it impossible for me to give you any kind of answer that would satisfy you.
Spoiler:
  TOYNBEE IDEA
IN KUBRICK'S 2001
RESURRECT DEAD
ON PLANET JUPITER
 


User avatar
ALF
Poster
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:21 pm
Location: The planet Melmac

Re: Death Penalty

Post by ALF » Sat Jan 05, 2013 3:11 am

It is really very simple, Hex.

There are only three options for possible causes for violent anti-social behaviour:

1. Genetic inheritance
2. Environmental influences
3. Neither of the above.

In case 3. it must be something outside of inheritance and environmental influences, that leaves only the supernatural (like the devil made him do it).

This leaves the question unanswered: why did the devil do it to someone and not someone else?

Hitler was an innocent baby once. He was born that way, harming no one.

He was born into a family, a country, a social and historical situation that shaped him, influenced him every step of his life. Other people would have reacted differently to those influences, but he also had his genetic makeup that made him vulnerable to those influences and twisted his mind into a sick, hate-ridden, horribly diabolical monster.

He was either the victim of his genetics/environment, or he was a victim of the devil.

In either case, he was a victim and, in his horrible fate (with the cooperation of many, many other twisted and sick minds) he piled up millions of dead bodies in his wake.

Do I want to excuse him? Of course not -- society needs to protect itself against sociopaths.

Do I need to hate him? What good would hate do? You need to isolate him, like a leprosy patient, so he can't harm anyone.

Killing anyone, unless the person requests it, is murder.
Nothing.....just screaming....

User avatar
Rob Lister
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:07 pm
Custom Title: Spline Reticulator
Location: My own little world

Re: Death Penalty

Post by Rob Lister » Sat Jan 05, 2013 3:22 am

Hitler was an innocent baby once. He was born that way, harming no one.
...
He was either the victim of his genetics/environment, or he was a victim of the devil.


Wow. Hitler was a victim?

{!#%@}.

you anti-Godwined the thread. That's gotta be a first. :lol:
Skeptic much? Sure you do.
http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/forum ... ive_topics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;