Quoting IADCA (Reply 98): How about something like reckless homicide, where there's no intent-to-kill requirement?

Not the same.

Most people use the words "murder" and "homicide" interchangeably, but they are not the same. Although murder and homicide are both used to describe the act of killing another human being, the circumstances surrounding the charges are different.

The easiest way to describe the differences between murder and homicide is that homicide is the killing of another human being, while murder requires the intent to kill another human being. Homicide can be used to describe any death where another person is at fault, but there are mitigating circumstances that can influence the charge of homicide. When someone is convicted of murder, however, they are not only convicted of a homicide, but also the malicious intent to kill.

Quoting KiwiinOz (Reply 99): I'd like to petition that any thread related to the death penalty should be limited to 30 replies and then locked. Consistently, the same arguments prop up in the first 30 responses as every previous threads, and they are then repeated throughout the rest of the thread.

I agree. The same two or three threads pop up almost once a week.

Quoting KiwiinOz (Reply 99): I'd like to petition that any thread related to the death penalty should be limited to 30 replies and then locked. Consistently, the same arguments prop up in the first 30 responses as every previous threads, and they are then repeated throughout the rest of the thread

Only if the same standard is applied to all the other repetitive threads on Anet....   

Quoting Nuori5084 (Reply 100): The easiest way to describe the differences between murder and homicide is that homicide is the killing of another human being, while murder requires the intent to kill another human being. Homicide can be used to describe any death where another person is at fault, but there are mitigating circumstances that can influence the charge of homicide. When someone is convicted of murder, however, they are not only convicted of a homicide, but also the malicious intent to kill.

Thank you, I am aware of the old common law distinction between murder and manslaughter (the two essential species of homicide), and I am also aware that most people are not aware of it. My point is that in a lot of places, what is more properly called "reckless homicide" under common law is actually labeled a subtype of murder. For example, the Model Penal Code Section 210.2 is labeled "murder." There are two avenues to a murder conviction under the MPC. One is, in subsection 1(a), "knowingly" or "purposely" killing someone. The other, subsection 1(b), is "recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to human life." Thus, in states that adopted this provision, intent to kill is not necessarily a prerequisite for murder. The MPC murder statute is the law in a good number of states, subject to minor variations.

[Edited 2007-11-28 17:09:48]

Quoting Stratosphere (Thread starter): it should be for these two bastards who killed this beautiful little girl.

And if the girl wasn't beautiful or killed by two "nice people"? I already agree that there are extenuating circumstances like this one, just questioning the use of the adjectives. Some people do that, as if giving reason or authority over another idea when they're all the same, i.e. dramatising.

If an ugly boy got killed by two people who you wouldn't think could hurt a fly, shall we invoke the death penalty, because you feel betrayed by the impression they gave you??

Might sound silly, the argument I'm making will be completely different than what's going on here, but my point is that the adjectives can change the image of situation, and therefore the outcome/judgement.

Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 94): Please refer to initial response. By entering into international agreements _freely_, the United States gives up some of its' sovereignty -- which we all do -- and which is a good thing. It forces us to behave more collegially and work together as opposed to against one another. But the USA has always regarded itself as above that. It violates international treaties at its' whim and basically says "Let the chips fall where they may".

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in not a legally binding treaty in any sense of the word. It has never been ratified by the U.S. Senate.


http://www.unac.org/rights/question.html

Q: Is the Declaration upheld universally. How is the Declaration enforced?
A: Originally the Universal Declaration was conceived as a statement of objectives to be pursued by Governments, and therefore it is not part of binding international law.

Ah, beaten to the punch again! lol Well anyway.....

In addition, if this article http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...m1079/is_n2141_v88/ai_6977618/pg_1 is to be believed it was founded on the principles that make up our Bill of Rights, which allows for execution based on the belief that it is not cruel and unusual punishment for certain capital crimes.

[Edited 2007-11-28 17:26:45]

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 102): Only if the same standard is applied to all the other repetitive threads on Anet....

I agree to that too

Any you had in mind? Gun control is one where the same arguments are just rehashed again and again. We can add that to the list

Quoting KiwiinOz (Reply 106): Quoting Halls120 (Reply 102): Only if the same standard is applied to all the other repetitive threads on Anet.... I agree to that too Any you had in mind? Gun control is one where the same arguments are just rehashed again and again. We can add that to the list

All of the stupid "what if airline X merged with airline Y" threads for starters......

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 96): Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 94): Please refer to initial response. which we have firmly established is wrong.

It is a declaration of intent, to my legal training (although not a lawyer, too busy with science for that). If anyone (or thing) has credibility, it follows through on declarations of its' intentions.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 96): That you think we are the only country that behaves unilaterally is laughable. I spent three years negotiating an international instrument that was almost derailed because of the intransigence of one delegation, who kept insisting that on one matter, they wanted their way or they would obstruct the then-growing consensus. Want to guess what country that delegation was from?

I can readily admit that from time to time my own government can be as single-minded or obstinate as is yours. Main difference being that we're are not seen and do not act as the world's policeman (self-appointed or not). This attitude is only likely to grow under our current PM Stephen Harper, who, oddly enough, is an intellectual soul-mate of many of your current administration.

Quoting Stratosphere (Thread starter): If there was ever a reason to invoke the death penalty it should be for these two bastards who killed this beautiful little girl.

Death is too good for them, years of suffering is more appropriate - I won't go into detail of what I think they deserve but it does involve pain............

"Trenor and Zeigler met a couple of years ago playing an online game, World of Warcraft, and she moved with her daughter from suburban Cleveland to Spring in June, Stickler said."


I can almost predict that someone is going to sue Blizzard based on this somehow

 

Quoting Cumulus (Reply 109): Death is too good for them, years of suffering is more appropriate - I won't go into detail of what I think they deserve but it does involve pain............

Unfortunately our Supreme Court would rule that as being "cruel and unusual punishment" and therefore Unconstitutional.

And the situation just gets worse:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/5334351.html

"He also revealed that Riley's mother, Kimberly Dawn Trenor, 19, is pregnant.

Fortunately for this child will probably have have better life:

"If Trenor gives birth while in custody, she will not be allowed to keep the child, Olguin said. She said Trenor is 5 feet 7 inches tall and 125 pounds and does not show, so it's unlikely that she is more than two months pregnant.

She said Trenor would be allowed to choose a relative to keep the child. If she did not, CPS would take the child."

But the sad part is that she is now claiming that "they never intended for the beating to get out of hand". Why did they feel the need to beat a 2 year old so severely to begin with? Because the stepfather who looks like a real loser did not think the child was learning her manners quickly enough! I'll bet that he gets to learn to say "please", "yes sir", and "no sir" real quick in the next few months.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 24): Irrelevant. So long as there is enough reliability to pass Constitutional muster, and there is accompanying evidence that is not circumstantial in nature, that's good enough for me.

Not necessarily so. In the United States, the jury determines the sentence in criminal cases. The burden of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt" for conviction and the jury can hold out in both the trial and penalty phases. All decisions to convict must be unanimous and IIRC, the same goes for the sentencing phase.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 86): At some point in the future, our Supreme Court may well indeed decide that the death penalty is a violation of human rights. Until they do, what the rest of the world thinks on this subject is largely irrelevant.

Agreed. Only the courts or legislatures have the authority to pass or void capital punishment laws.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 81): The Legislature of my home state of New Jersey is seriously considering the elimination of the Death Penalty from it's laws probably to be replaced by life without parole.

Interesting that you mention that. IIRC, the elimination of capital punishment is to come to the floor for debate on or around December 12. I also recall that the Governor is an advocate of abolition too. If NJ does abolish capital punishment, they'll join their neighbors across New York Harbor as the latest states to abolish capital punishment. Yes, New York State is officially counted as no longer having capital punishment. Their last statute that authorized capital punishment was declared unconstitutional by the NY State Supreme Court and the Legislature there has not been able to pass a Bill to reinstate it. I doubt that it will get much traction as most efforts to reinstate capital punishment have not succeeded. Michigan (capital punishment abolished in 1846) is a prime example as there have been multiple attempts to reinstate capital punishment there-all of which failed by a large margin.

Stratosphere,

So you're saying that if they killed an ugly girl the murder wouldn't be as tragic?


Andrea Kent

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 113): Stratosphere, So you're saying that if they killed an ugly girl the murder wouldn't be as tragic? Andrea Kent

Ahh don't misinterpret my original post. I will admit children can get on my nerves especially the ones behind my seat when flying. That said I meant beautiful in the context of innocent. Children are totally dependant on adults to care for them and it breaks my heart to see any child be abused or to see a child suffer who is terminally ill. My main charities that I give to are St Jude childrens resaerch hospital and the ASPCA because animals too are innocent and are at the mercy of us to care for them.

Yet another lowlife, worthless, sack of shit that deserves the death penalty.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314120,00.html

SUMMERTON, S.C. - A mother and daughter were hugging each other in a child's bedroom when the daughter's ex-boyfriend shot and killed them both, authorities said.

About a half-dozen shots were fired at Teresa Lynelle Johnson, 19, and her mother Barbara Johnson, 49, after the man broke into their home early Thursday morning, Clarendon County Chief Deputy Joe Bradham said.

The women were killed in the bedroom of the daughter's 14-month-old child, who was also in the room, but was not harmed, authorities said.

The daughter's ex-boyfriend, Charles Junious, 24, was arrested less than an hour after the shooting and has been charged with two counts of murder, one count of first-degree burglary and one count of possession of a weapon during a violent crime, Bradham said. A call to the Clarendon County jail early Friday morning went unanswered.

Quoting Lobster (Reply 115):

If found guilty, I think he should be terminated. Imagine how the last seconds were for the two women. There is simply no allowance in life for that I think.

People that kill women and children are absolutely the worst. It sickens and angers me every time I hear about something like that.   I hope the two rest in peace.

Quoting Deskflier (Reply 5): There was a study carried out in the late 1990s that showed that lifers actually cost the taxpayers less than those on Death Row. This because those convicted to die made a lot of appeals to have the sentence converted to life imprisonment, or even revoked. Often with lawyers who were paid by taxpayers dollars, at least the DAs and Judges are on a public payroll. At the same time, the lifers just settled in their cells and didn't cost much more than food and shelter. Another thought on this: Suppose that the Boys in Blue catch the wrong person and the DA gets him convicted. If you execute him it would be really really hard to compensate for the slip-up once it is revealed.

I will chime in on this one. The case involving this child has obvious guilt by the two. I would really prefer to see the two executed outside the courthouse. That poor little girl. Child killers should be a mandatory death penalty. That is how I feel about it.

Oh man, what did this poor little girl do to deserve such? Why don't people just give the child up to someone that will lay nothing but loving hands on them? Why kill an innocent child? WTF is going through these peoples heads?

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 90): Quoting Klaus (Reply 87): Sloppy standards + death penalty = insufferable injustice Not on my watch.

What you've posted yourself speaks differently.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 90): Quoting Klaus (Reply 87): So what's left? Bloodlust? Indifference to the value of other people's lives and to the well-known risk of miscarriages of justice? No, and no. Elimination of that small number of sociopaths who are not capable of rehabilitation and cannot be allowed to live in a free society.

You and all the other proponents of the death penalty never stop to ask themselves whether the "scum" or "sociopaths" they've already set their sights on are really the actual culprits.

That makes you all sound suspiciously intent on satisfying your own needs to have someone killed for the crime, with little interest in whether it's the right person.

Awfully close to the classic scapegoat situation - yeah, in some cases that might actually hit the odd murderer. But what about the others?

(Assuming, for the moment, that the death penalty was in any way defensible at all.)

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 90): Quoting Klaus (Reply 87): Quoting Halls120 (Reply 86): You intending to invade the US to stop our executions? It would be completely impractical at present and substantially disproportionate, but intense external pressure in response to human rights abuses should indeed not be ruled out. The first steps on the UN level to outlaw the death penalty are a good beginning. So let's say that the UN "outlaws" the death penalty if and before our Supreme Court does the same. A big fat "so what" with regard to the UN action would be in order, I believe.

Oh, it's just another step the world is making forwards and leaving you further behind. Nothing special, really, in the grand scheme of things.  

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 90): Quoting Klaus (Reply 87): To you, apparently. The essential issue should still be whether the american population itself should suffer this kind of human rights abuse in their name. Until the Supreme Court outlaws the practice, or the Congress enacts a statutory prohibition to the same effect, it really can't be considered a "human rights abuse."

Universal Human Rights are not dependent on whether the US SC acknowledges them. Otherwise any dictator (hint! hint!) could simply declare them null and void (as they usually do) and be automatically free of any repercussions.

And I can only hope that we agree that that is just not on.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 92): Quoting Klaus (Reply 82): And there is no "irrefutable" evidence in the real world, If you have a video tape that technicians can authenticate as being the real thing and not tampered with, and it clearly shows the perp pulling a gun and shooting the convenience story clerk in the head, that is pretty irrefutable.

Video identification is tricky business and has been wrong on several occasions, even with self-proclaimed "experts" taking an oath on their absolute certainty.

People often look for "perfect" evidence provided by (pseudo-)scientific methods, but science itself is never "perfect" - it always comes with probabilities, and those are always lower than 1. Which means that certainty is not a scientific concept and from all we know is never achievable in the real world.

And that automatically means that subjective judgment comes into it again. Which is expressed among other things by the strangely elevated proportion of blacks in death row relative to the number of indictments in the USA.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 92): Quoting Klaus (Reply 82): Any enlightened civilization. Spoken like a true Utopian. Unfortunately the rest of us live in the real world.

Have you looked around yourself recently? You are comfortably living in a world created by those who you denounce as "utopians" with so much contempt.

Quoting Nuori5084 (Reply 97): Any murder conviction should be an automatic death penalty. Children killers should get expedited to the front of the line.

Great! The best method by far to significantly raise the number of innocent people executed for a crime they didn't commit, and a strong disincentive to re-examine defective trials since "we already executed someone for it, why bother?"   

Quoting KiwiinOz (Reply 99): I'd like to petition that any thread related to the death penalty should be limited to 30 replies and then locked. Consistently, the same arguments prop up in the first 30 responses as every previous threads, and they are then repeated throughout the rest of the thread.

If you cannot bear repetition, you should not use open internet fora. Nor interact with human beings a lot, while we're at it. Even your own request itself is a bit repetitive.   

But seriously, new people come into the forum, and new aspects arise as well in light of recent events. So important issues like this one just will be discussed many times, with changing participants and changing contexts.

Quoting Lehpron (Reply 104): And if the girl wasn't beautiful or killed by two "nice people"? I already agree that there are extenuating circumstances like this one, just questioning the use of the adjectives. Some people do that, as if giving reason or authority over another idea when they're all the same, i.e. dramatising. If an ugly boy got killed by two people who you wouldn't think could hurt a fly, shall we invoke the death penalty, because you feel betrayed by the impression they gave you??

Quite a good point. People clamouring for the death penalty should ask themselves to what extent they are really asking for justice and to what extent they're just following an urge to satisfy their own voyeuristic emotions.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 118): Great! The best method by far to significantly raise the number of innocent people executed for a crime they didn't commit, and a strong disincentive to re-examine defective trials since "we already executed someone for it, why bother?"

Story time for Klaus.

Back in the day when I worked for Garrett, we would periodically receive aircraft engines from the Argentine Navy, and we would repair them, put all new accessories on them, and ship them back to Argentina. I worked on a couple of them and I did a good competent repair job and made them run like big-assed birds. These engines came from the Argentine Navy's fleet of Shorts Skyvans, and thereby hangs a tale.

What these airplanes got used for is taking people out about 20 miles, tying their hands with cable ties, pushing them out the door and seeing whether they could swim back to shore.

When I found out years later what I'd been peripherally involved in, I was ashamed.

It was about that time I started to ask myself whether I could ever believe whole heartedly in giving that much power to government. I still don't have the answer, and I'm glad my corner of the world doesn't execute people any more.

[Edited 2007-12-01 21:28:47]

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 119): What these airplanes got used for is taking people out about 20 miles, tying their hands with cable ties, pushing them out the door and seeing whether they could swim back to shore. When I found out years later what I'd been peripherally involved in, I was ashamed.

I can imagine. That kind of thing is not what one wants to learn about one's work. 

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 119): It was about that time I started to ask myself whether I could ever believe whole heartedly in giving that much power to government. I still don't have the answer, and I'm glad my corner of the world doesn't execute people any more.

Yeah, there's already plenty of killing on the planet. No need to add to it.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 118): Video identification is tricky business and has been wrong on several occasions, even with self-proclaimed "experts" taking an oath on their absolute certainty.

BS, source that. I think it's funny that they are always "self proclaimed" experts, unless they happen to agree with your position as I will explain below. Right now you are just throwing any kind of crap on the wall now to see if it will stick. Your interpretation would have let Jack Ruby off the hook as well as numerous others.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 118): People often look for "perfect" evidence provided by (pseudo-)scientific methods, but science itself is never "perfect" - it always comes with probabilities, and those are always lower than 1. Which means that certainty is not a scientific concept and from all we know is never achievable in the real world.

Unless we are talking about (gasp) global warming!   
Australian Election Results (by Mal787 Nov 24 2007 in Non Aviation)?threadid=1764576&searchid=1764971&s=global+warming+klaus#ID1764971
reply 16
There is overwhelming evidence for it, and the case is still getting tighter. But there is still enough residual uncertainty that people can delude themselves into thinking there wasn't if they shut eyes and ears tightly enough.

So on the matter of accurately identifying someone on a piece of tape, or digital image, which are proven technologies invented by man, there is too much room for doubt to place blame. Yet on a matter that encompasses a problem on a global scale, of which we have precious little actual historical evidence, there is little room for doubt to place blame. Now that makes sense.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 118): Have you looked around yourself recently? You are comfortably living in a world created by those who you denounce as "Utopians" with so much contempt.

No, I am comfortably living in a world with inventions created by visionaries, governed by laws handed down from enlightened men. The enlightened men saw the need for capitol punishment and the visionaries have seen fit to make it as humane as possible. I agree with the laws the enlightened men handed down and am passe about the methods the visionaries have created. You and Baroque on the other hand are Utopians in the true sense in that the world you wish to live in only runs the way you wish and any other ideas are simply rubbish to be put out at the street corner.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 118): You and all the other proponents of the death penalty never stop to ask themselves whether the "scum" or "sociopaths" they've already set their sights on are really the actual culprits

Actually, if you had bothered to actually read my posts on the death penalty, you'd see that I reject the use of it for purposes of retribution, revenge, or as a deterrent.

I would never advocate the execution of someone unless I was assured that he or she was guilty, a sociopath unfit for continued existence in a free society, and beyond rehabilitation.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 118): That makes you all sound suspiciously intent on satisfying your own needs to have someone killed for the crime, with little interest in whether it's the right person.

No. What's really going on here is that you are looking for ways to reinforce your own assumed mantle of ethical superiority.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 118): Universal Human Rights are not dependent on whether the US SC acknowledges them. Otherwise any dictator (hint! hint!) could simply declare them null and void (as they usually do) and be automatically free of any repercussions.

Well, first of all, since we have a functioning democratic government, I;m not too worried about your latter comment, Now if I lived in Venezuela, I might be worried.

Are you going to make the same mistake as the other poster and proclaim that there is an agreed upon international instrument binding on all governments regarding the concpet of "universal" human rights?

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 119): When I found out years later what I'd been peripherally involved in, I was ashamed.

I don't see why, unless you had any idea that when you were repairing those engines, that they would be put to the use you described,

It's sort of like someone working on the assembly line at GM. Should he or she be ashamed because a future operator decides to load a panel van full of explosives and blow up a federal building?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 121): BS, source that. I think it's funny that they are always "self proclaimed" experts, unless they happen to agree with your position as I will explain below. Right now you are just throwing any kind of crap on the wall now to see if it will stick.

Nonsense. A quick Google search couldn't confirm my recollection, so I won't insist on this particular point for the time being. But your accusation of my supposedly evil intentions is still baseless and implausible.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 121): Unless we are talking about (gasp) global warming!

The imaginary "perfection" of scientific evidence is, weirdly, primarily claimed and then immediately attacked by people who can't live with the results science happens to provide at any given time.

I myself have consistently tried to explain that science never deals in absolute certainty and by definition cannot do that.

But none of my numerous explanations has ever been able to reach you, it appears.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 121): So on the matter of accurately identifying someone on a piece of tape, or digital image, which are proven technologies invented by man, there is too much room for doubt to place blame.

"Proven" for what? A limited-resolution video with technical artefacts of the recording and the notoriously unreliable human judgment can do a lot of things, but they cannot be a valid basis for deciding to put a human being to death.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 121): Yet on a matter that encompasses a problem on a global scale, of which we have precious little actual historical evidence, there is little room for doubt to place blame.

Getting more efficient and wasting less would be an excellent idea even without all the evidence we've got - which only makes the matter more pressing. And none of the proposed actions involves killing people, quite the opposite, in fact.

The burden of proof is vastly different.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 121): No, I am comfortably living in a world with inventions created by visionaries, governed by laws handed down from enlightened men. The enlightened men saw the need for capitol punishment and the visionaries have seen fit to make it as humane as possible.

a) It's "capital punishment".

b) They also thought that slavery was okay and that women shouldn't be allowed to vote (among other things). You okay with that, too?   

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 121): You and Baroque on the other hand are Utopians in the true sense in that the world you wish to live in only runs the way you wish and any other ideas are simply rubbish to be put out at the street corner.

Do you really not see the slightest moral dilemma in capital punishment? Not even in the fact that false convictions and executions are a common occurrence?

Getting personal is your only resort regarding this topic?

Well, that is telling enough on its own.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 122): Actually, if you had bothered to actually read my posts on the death penalty, you'd see that I reject the use of it for purposes of retribution, revenge, or as a deterrent.

Great. And where does that laudable sentiment actually express itself?

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 122): I would never advocate the execution of someone unless I was assured that he or she was guilty, a sociopath unfit for continued existence in a free society, and beyond rehabilitation.

"Assured"? Now that will be a great consolation for the innocent people convicted and executed and for their families. Don't you think that personal (and ultimately still subjective) "assurance" is a bit weak as a reason to kill another human being?

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 122): What's really going on here is that you are looking for ways to reinforce your own assumed mantle of ethical superiority.

The desire of achieving ethical superiority is pretty much the founding myth of the USA, is it not?   

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 122): Well, first of all, since we have a functioning democratic government, I;m not too worried about your latter comment, Now if I lived in Venezuela, I might be worried.

Are you kidding? The violation of human rights would be fully okay with you if it was just committed by a democracy? That is bizarre to say the very least!

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 122): Are you going to make the same mistake as the other poster and proclaim that there is an agreed upon international instrument binding on all governments regarding the concpet of "universal" human rights?

Formally? No, not without formal ratification.

Morally? Well, that is an entirely different matter...

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 122): I don't see why, unless you had any idea that when you were repairing those engines, that they would be put to the use you described,

Feeling a moral impulse in such a situation is very human. Judicial culpability is a different matter.

Quoting Lobster (Reply 131): Quoting NoUFO (Reply 130): said punisment is considered cruel and inhuman. Thats a complete load of bullshit.

Because you say so?

Quoting Lobster (Reply 131): You people never seem to give a rats ass about how the victim died, how brutal, agonizing, and painful it was.

Speaking of bull ...
You don't know me, nor other opponents of capital punishment, so how in the world can you draw the conclusion that only proponents of the death penalty fully acknowledge the brutality behind the crime the murderer committed?
Same argument could be used against you by those who want to see murderers skinned alive, quartered or impaled, since the execution practice in the U.S. would still be "far to human" to properly address their crimes.

Quoting Lobster (Reply 131): These people should forfeit their "human rights" {Yeah sure} by committing the acts they do.

Human rights are those basic rights all persons are entitled to - equally, universally, and forever, simply because he or she is a human being.
I'm not sure why you put the the term 'human rights' in quotation marks, followed by a smiley expressing sarcasm, but I do consider it fundamental for any modern, peaceful nation to recognize the value of human rights.
You might think its a drag, and that it would be so much easier not to feel restricted by the typical limitations modern criminal law comes with, but it's the hidden power of low, brute instincts that drive you and and others to think this way. All of us may have the barely concealed desire for bitter revenge from time to time. But it's really a good idea to keep this genie in the bottle.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 134): It would be cruel an inhuman if we slowly carved the prisoner up or skinned them alive. Lethal injection, or a firing squad is not cruel since, if done properly, the condemned has no chance to feel any pain.

Mock executions are considered torture (even by the U.S.), real executions are not. In the former case the person stays alive, in the latter case the person is dead.

That said, I believe capital punishment contributes to the brutalization of parts of the population, ultimately leading to more cases of murder.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 137): Mock executions are considered torture (even by the U.S.), real executions are not. In the former case the person stays alive, in the latter case the person is dead.

A false execution would be considered torture simply because you are teasing the person for lack of a better term. In a real execution the person is dead, so cannot feel dread or embarrassment as we know it.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 137): That said, I believe capital punishment contributes to the brutalization of parts of the population, ultimately leading to more cases of murder.

That statement would fly in the face of all those here who have said the exact opposite, that the death penalty does not deter someone from committing murder. Which is it?

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 138): In a real execution the person is dead, so cannot feel dread or embarrassment as we know it.

After a real execution the person is dead. After a mock execution the panic of the person quickly decreases. In both cases, the moments before are exactly the same, the result differs.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 138): That statement would fly in the face of all those here who have said the exact opposite, that the death penalty does not deter someone from committing murder.

How is the effect of brutalizing a society, ultimately leading to more cases of murder the exact opposite of the claim that the death penalty does not deter people from killing others?

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 137): Because you say so?

Because our Supreme Court says its not.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 137): Speaking of bull ... You don't know me, nor other opponents of capital punishment, so how in the world can you draw the conclusion that only proponents of the death penalty fully acknowledge the brutality behind the crime the murderer committed?

I haven't heard your side yet. so........

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 137): Human rights are those basic rights all persons are entitled to - equally, universally, and forever, simply because he or she is a human being. I'm not sure why you put the the term 'human rights' in quotation marks, followed by a smiley expressing sarcasm, but I do consider it fundamental for any modern, peaceful nation to recognize the value of human rights. You might think its a drag, and that it would be so much easier not to feel restricted by the typical limitations modern criminal law comes with, but it's the hidden power of low, brute instincts that drive you and and others to think this way. All of us may have the barely concealed desire for bitter revenge from time to time. But it's really a good idea to keep this genie in the bottle.

Well isn't that noble of you to take the "love everyone" approach. Please, these people lose any "right" they had when they committed the crime they did.

I also think that the government should give families the option of "executing" the person who committed the crime. Because if someone did something horrible to my family, I'd sure as shit want to end them.


And yet another reason for the death penalty:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314743,00.html

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 139): After a real execution the person is dead.

And there lies the basic difference. A dead person cannot feel anxiety or have nightmares about being tricked into believing he or she was about to be executed.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 139): How is the effect of brutalizing a society, ultimately leading to more cases of murder the exact opposite of the claim that the death penalty does not deter people from killing others?

If I understood your first comment you are saying that you believe that capital punishment leads to more murders. In other words there are more murders because of capital punishment. Since an execution by the State is not murder, but the carrying out of a legally handed down sentence of punishment, "leads to more murders" must mean murders in the sense of one person killing another either in the commission of a crime or as a crime itself. That puts you at exact odds with those that say that capital punishment does not deter murder. They do not say it leads to more murder but that it does not stop those that would have occured whether or not there was such a thing as capital punishment. Correct me if I am wrong. If you believe capital punishment to be murder then you must consider every soldier that has ever killed an enemy to be a murderer as well since they also kill on the orders of the State/Nation.

Quoting Lobster (Reply 140): Well isn't that noble of you to take the "love everyone" approach.

I don't love you. And there are roughly 5 Billion other people I don't love.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 141): If you believe capital punishment to be murder (...)

No, capital punishment is of course not murder (at least not in the USA), and soldiers are a different case all-together, as is self-defence.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 141): They do not say it leads to more murder but that it does not stop those that would have occured whether or not there was such a thing as capital punishment.

Correct, but without really being able to back it up, I think (I'm not confident) capital punishment leads to more murder. There are numbers that hint it's true, but they are too small to provide scientific evidence.

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 142): Correct, but without really being able to back it up, I think (I'm not confident) capital punishment leads to more murder. There are numbers that hint it's true, but they are too small to provide scientific evidence.

Without any facts to back this claim up, it's pretty worthless.

An yet another cockroach deserving of capital punishment:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315245,00.html

lexis Goggins, 7, was hit protecting her mother Selietha Parker, 30, after Parker's ex-boyfriend Calvin Tillie, 29, forced the pair and family friend Aisha Ford to drive to Six Mile Road under threat of death, the Detroit News reported.


Tillie, who was armed with a handgun, shot Parker in the side of the head and in the arm after Ford stopped for gas, but before he could fire a third shot, Goggins jumped over the seat between her mother and Tillie, begging him to stop, the Detroit News reported. Without hesitation, Tillie reportedly pumped six shots into the child.

The first grader is in stable condition at Children’s Hospital in Detroit with gunshot wounds to the eye, left temple, chin, cheek, chest and right arm, the Detroit News reported. Parker was admitted to the hospital, but later released.

Quoting DL021 (Reply 29): Death would serve notice to others that there is a terminal penalty for murder.

Hasn't been a deterrent at all obviously ...
/Milan320

Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 91): And none of those conclusions rise to the standard that would be the inevitable precondition for even considering the application of the death penalty.

Mine too

Quoting Lobster (Reply 131): You people never seem to give a rats ass about how the victim died, how brutal, agonizing, and painful it was. These cockroaches should be put to death the same way they murdered their victims. These people should forfeit their "human rights" Yeah sure by committing the acts they do.

Why? what is that going to achieve? If you are trying to achieve revenge, OK in your terms (not in at least mine). What else is accomplished?

I don't agree with the principle of the death penalty. This disagreement of mine gets even stronger because I know the judicial system is actually not perfect. This last fact makes it unacceptable for me at least to support death penalty since I would be knowingly supporting taking the lives of innocent people. That is enough to not even consider support for it.

The system will never be perfect.

Quoting Ogre727 (Reply 146): Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 91):And none of those conclusions rise to the standard that would be the inevitable precondition for even considering the application of the death penalty. Mine too

You attributed Klaus' statement to me. I did figure out however that, while you didn't use the quote function correctly, you are agreeing with Klaus, and was trying to say that your opinion is the same as his. That's fine too, as opinions vary.

Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 147): You attributed Klaus' statement to me. I

Sorry about the mix up.

Quoting Stratosphere (Thread starter): If there was ever a reason to invoke the death penalty it should be for these two bastards who killed this beautiful little girl.

The death penalty is the only thing that fits this sort of crime,sitting in prison for the rest of their life and the tax payers paying for these sickos is not a good idea. I believe life for a life when it comes to-

rape of a child
murder of a child
sexual asult on a child

the same goes for Adults who suffer the same thing. I only wish that the UK bring in the death penulty for this sort of crime as our Government keeps saying,we will get tough on crime, but they don't which makes me sick.

dave

Parenthetically, Japan's executioner had a bang up day recently.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7132048.stm

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 150): Parenthetically, Japan's executioner had a bang up day recently.

I really wonder what they did? The article didn't say. I know to our German A netters's Klaus and NoUFO we death penalty proponents seem as unreasonable as I was to the Sudanese public wanting to execute the teacher for naming a teddy bear "Mohammad" now to me that insane. So in that context I respect the dialogue here. But you have to understand In Germany you don't see murder like it is here. We have every now and then serial killers and when they are caught and there is no doubt they are guilty there is in my opinion no reason they should be kept alive at taxpayer expense they are evil and evil has to be done away with period. I have said in previous posts I don't support the death penalty in all murder cases because our system is not perfect and the innocent sometimes get caught up in it. But when the evidence is overwhelming and the crime horrendous like this one you bet I am for it.

Quoting Stratosphere (Reply 151): I know to our German A netters's Klaus and NoUFO we death penalty proponents seem as unreasonable as I was to the Sudanese public wanting to execute the teacher for naming a teddy bear "Mohammad" now to me that insane.

I understand you are exaggerating a bit, but Sudan and similar countries are of course different from the U.S., which, after all, is a country under the rule of law with independent courts. No matter how much I disagree with your current federal administration, the U.S. is still a democratic country with some enviable aspects. The death penalty does not belong to them.

Take my sister-in-law, the toughest woman and one of the friendliests human-beings I ever met. She's in doubt more left-leaning than I am, but since she became Mom of the possibly cutest daughter one can imagine, she says she wouldn't mind seeing serial rapists sentenced to death. I can understand that, I just don't agree with her.

When I was still working for amnesty international, I was often invited by teachers to discuss the death penalty. The first thing I said to the students was that I didn't come to tell them that proponents of the death penalty have no morals, but to challenge their mental models as they can challenge mine.
It can happen that I feel that someone has pulled the rug out from my very understanding of the world - the sharia comes to mind - but you didn't.

Quoting Stratosphere (Reply 151): But you have to understand In Germany you don't see murder like it is here.

Not as "often", but you certainly do.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3013414.ece

Yeah I guess it happens everywhere...But. This article you posted while vile seems to invoke a different side of the debate for me. We had the same thing happen here except it was 4 children. But mothers, not that I should give them any kind of pass on this but I look at that different. More like a mental health issue. I know it is semantics but someone who enjoys killing and will continue to kill others if allowed into society that is what I reserve for the ultimate penalty. But I do think you guys( you and Klaus) are good people and I respect you. We can always agree to disagree. I applaud you for your convictions but I have mine also.

Quoting Stratosphere (Reply 151): Quoting Dougloid (Reply 150): Parenthetically, Japan's executioner had a bang up day recently. I really wonder what they did?

sorry about that-comin' right up, sir.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iNZFx46pJ6wb2K9z_r8msJ7aHIuA

From AFP (Agencie France Press, bes' li'l ole news wire in Europe, cantcha tell, because they let it ALL hang out, dontcha see?)

TOKYO (AFP) — Japan on Friday hanged three convicted murderers in the country's first executions in more than three months, but in one concession to critics it disclosed executed inmates' names for the first time.

Japan is the only major industrialised country other than the United States to use the death penalty, which enjoys strong support among the public despite criticism from human rights groups.

The hangings bring to nine the number of executions this year in Japan. The last executions were in August, about a month before Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, seen as more centrist than his conservative predecessor, took office.

In one step that pleased death-penalty opponents, the justice ministry for the first time released the names of the executed inmates.

"On consideration, we decided to release a bit more information. I made the decision," said Justice Minister Kunio Hatoyama, who signed off on his first executions since assuming the post in August.

The inmates were Noboru Ikemoto, 75, who was hanged in the western metropolis of Osaka, and Seiha Fujima, 47, and Hiroki Fukawa, 42, who were executed in Tokyo, a justice ministry statement said

The grand jury took all of three minutes to return an indictment of 1st degree murder . Now we just have to wait for the Prosecutor to finish the investigation but unless they cut a deal, I think they are going to overdose while relaxing on a table in Huntsville sometime in the future. Good riddance. Shame we can't beat them with belts, hold their heads underwater, and then smash their heads against a tile floor like they did to this little girl.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5372766.html