06 Aug 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWould you believe the following text.
Then why is he fighting it? Clearly, he doesn't want to die. Besides, studies show that for every criminal executed, 18 lives are saved:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14648
"New studies have shown that the death penalty increases the possibility of you personally being murdered".
This has the same amount of evidence to back it up as the post you link to. There is no reference to these reports or who wrote them or when or even where.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by ZahlanziHis trial occurred 20+ years ago. That's another problem I have with our "justice" system -- criminals are able to game the system and cheat the hangman's noose through legal obfuscation.
if his trial lasts more than 5 minutes, the world is really fuked up.
but then again, when a woman sues starbuck for being stupid and spilling some hot coffee on herself and not only she is not laughed at but she gets a fat settlement, we can safely say that some people have lost their common sense.
i even heard of a dude that scolded is willy in the shower and sued the town hall.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by WheelyOK -- you don't like that, then try this:
Would you believe the following text.
"New studies have shown that the death penalty increases the possibility of you personally being murdered".
This has the same amount of evidence to back it up as the post you link to. There is no reference to these reports or who wrote them or when or even where.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/11/national/main2911428.shtml
# Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14).
# The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston.
# Speeding up executions would strengthen the deterrent effect. For every 2.75 years cut from time spent on death row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by NemesioHence my hyperbolic recitation of the history of how we civilized folks of western European descent have dealt with the issue.
People prefer the sanitized capital punishment. It's easier on their conscience. If the action of killing
has the superficial appearance of being merciful, then the result (death) has a muted character.
We can function under the pretense of civility by making the execution painless, but it remains
no less a sport than the suggestions you made, though we ...[text shortened]... t's truly a shame that we, in essence, have not risen above this barbaric practice.
Nemesio
Essentially, Gandhi's riposte was spot on when he was asked his opinion of Western civilization: "I think it would be a good idea."
06 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by karnachzAs an attorney, I have to weigh a great many variables in assessing whether to instigate litigation. When I learned that both the psychologist and the psychiatrist who had been treating my son for more than 8 years knew he had possession of a .38 revolver, intended to harm himself, but made a conscious professional judgment not to warn me or my wife, I think they were in error. I know that their privacy shield based on professional privilege would not stand up to a lawsuit or disciplinary proceeding that would deprive them, perhaps, of their licenses and cost them something in damages.
There's more than one reason why I personally wouldn't commit murder. The risk of criminal punishment is one reason, but there's also the fact that I wouldn't want to have to live with knowing I'd killed someone.
So here is how I weighed the variables: I thought of the story told in one of my Dharma sessions about an African tribe called the Ko. It was said that when members of this tribe captured one who had killed a family member, the killer was bound, taken a short distance from shore into water deep enough to drown in and submerged. The family then had a choice: they could let the killer drown and they would have justice, but the tribe believed in that case they would be doomed to mourn their loss forever; if, on the other hand, they went into the water, saved the killer from drowning, and released him to bear his action on his soul, the family would retain of their lost one all that was good in having that one in their lives and would be able to leave the darkness associated with that one's death behind.
So, I decided that while the doctors made a serious mistake with fatal consequences that changed the lives of my wife, daughter and me forever, they did so in good faith and seeking revenge in the guise of justice would only poison us. Plus, they would have to defend themselves, and thus we would also be on trial -- an ordeal I determined none of us were prepared to endure.
So I think we ought to think more about the costs of taking a life in the name of the State, which is to say, in our name, apart from the costs of keeping killers confined and depriving them of the ability to kill again.
Rather than imprison the vast number of people for victimless crimes as we do, we could cut costs by imprisoning those who commit violent crimes, whether they are mentally competent or not, and keep them for life from the ability to repeat their offenses.
In short, we need a nationwide course in anger management.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI'd love to know how they determined those values.
OK -- you don't like that, then try this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/11/national/main2911428.shtml
# Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14).
# The Illinois m ...[text shortened]... row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by AThousandYoungWow!!! I think you need to drop the romantic vision of prison you have and keep in mind the forced sodomy.
I thought about that. There are people I'd like to kill assuming I could get away with it. I believe in the system, but something could happen to push me over the edge.
The death penalty itself does not scare me. Death doesn't scare me very much any more. The Death Penalty takes forever to actually kill people, so I'd even have time to do stuff ...[text shortened]... ogically it seems more unpleasant - not the death itself, but the life waiting to die.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThose studies have ludicrous flaws. See http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/DonohueDeter.pdf pp. 2-3
OK -- you don't like that, then try this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/11/national/main2911428.shtml
# Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14).
# The Illinois m ...[text shortened]... row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.