Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Capital Punishment, what are your views on it?

Page 4 of 9 [ 141 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,505
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

03 Jan 2010, 3:18 am

Sand wrote:
Well, maybe there are better uses for these monsters than lopping off their heads. Someone that far gone should be eligible for major nerve system modification. Let the researchers at them to see what radical surgery or psychological conditioning can do. Maybe that will benefit some body of knowledge as to how mutable people can be. Something along the lines of "The Clockwork Orange" without a reprieve.

Going by Clockwork Orange are you sure about the ethics of that even?



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,505
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

03 Jan 2010, 3:25 am

Meadow wrote:
^ If you're trying to be offensive you're doing a really good job.

Remind me - I'll have to take down a list of what offends you and see if we can't change the forum rules of conduct to accommodate your sensibilities.



Meadow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Dec 2009
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,067

03 Jan 2010, 3:29 am

^ Sounds nifty



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Jan 2010, 3:30 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Sand wrote:
Well, maybe there are better uses for these monsters than lopping off their heads. Someone that far gone should be eligible for major nerve system modification. Let the researchers at them to see what radical surgery or psychological conditioning can do. Maybe that will benefit some body of knowledge as to how mutable people can be. Something along the lines of "The Clockwork Orange" without a reprieve.

Going by Clockwork Orange are you sure about the ethics of that even?


Conditioning someone to reject violence is not too bad an idea - especially someone with extreme sadistic drives.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,505
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

03 Jan 2010, 3:48 am

Sand wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Going by Clockwork Orange are you sure about the ethics of that even?

Conditioning someone to reject violence is not too bad an idea - especially someone with extreme sadistic drives.

You have to ask the question then how much pounding, breaking, and torquing would that take on their nervous system? How much would be there for leftovers after the process was complete? I think this one would scare and offend most people even more than what its supposed to replace.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,505
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

03 Jan 2010, 4:01 am

SporadSpontan wrote:
And I'm not necessarily proposing that someone who is suspected of being dangerous be allowed the opportunity to reoffend. But the thing that I find incomprehensible - is how can it be justified to kill a person? It's not justified is it? So why is it then a lawful practice? IMO there really is no difference between the person who commits the crime of killing and the people who support the law that kills them. It's all exactly the same crime. And I'm at a loss that you cannot see that?!

I tend to be of the thought that the value of human life is conditional - we all begin with value placed on our lives but we can repeal our value through our own actions. I don't see what it does for us to keep people of that nature around. People have proven somewhat effectively that there isn't a lot of deterrent in capital punishment (and yes, it is only death...possibly....maybe eight to ten years after incarceration - if ever). If you're making the argument that keeping them alive does no more harm than the tax dollars for their upkeep - I can't say anything at this point for or against that argument, I don't know that I'd trust the logic but at the same time I can't refute it either. On the other hand though, I guess I can't really see it as an issue of two wrongs - its more a somber re-enforcement of natural consequence.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Jan 2010, 4:13 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Sand wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Going by Clockwork Orange are you sure about the ethics of that even?

Conditioning someone to reject violence is not too bad an idea - especially someone with extreme sadistic drives.

You have to ask the question then how much pounding, breaking, and torquing would that take on their nervous system? How much would be there for leftovers after the process was complete? I think this one would scare and offend most people even more than what its supposed to replace.


Basically these people have thrown away their basic decent humanity and deserve little sympathy. Their death contributes little to humanity. This could could contribute much, much more. The only major glitch in the logic is the frightfully corrupt and distorted legal procedures now in operation which surely has convicted innocent people because the district attorneys are not motivated by truth but by victories in conviction. Legal corruption and incompetence destroys the rationality of the whole concept.



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

03 Jan 2010, 4:46 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
SporadSpontan wrote:
And I'm not necessarily proposing that someone who is suspected of being dangerous be allowed the opportunity to reoffend. But the thing that I find incomprehensible - is how can it be justified to kill a person? It's not justified is it? So why is it then a lawful practice? IMO there really is no difference between the person who commits the crime of killing and the people who support the law that kills them. It's all exactly the same crime. And I'm at a loss that you cannot see that?!

I tend to be of the thought that the value of human life is conditional - we all begin with value placed on our lives but we can repeal our value through our own actions. I don't see what it does for us to keep people of that nature around. People have proven somewhat effectively that there isn't a lot of deterrent in capital punishment (and yes, it is only death...possibly....maybe eight to ten years after incarceration - if ever). If you're making the argument that keeping them alive does no more harm than the tax dollars for their upkeep - I can't say anything at this point for or against that argument, I don't know that I'd trust the logic but at the same time I can't refute it either. On the other hand though, I guess I can't really see it as an issue of two wrongs - its more a somber re-enforcement of natural consequence.


The argument I'm making is not that keeping them alive does no more harm than the tax dollars. It's much much more than that. What it does for us as a society - to keep people like this around - is it makes us a humane society. So for no other reason than that it is worth it. And IMO that is a very very great reason.

And why do you see it as a natural consequence - that supposedly rational people should kill a person who irrationally killed another? Does it seem natural to you because that is the society you have grown up in? Because here in Australia capital punishment is not part of our judicial system and I do not see it as a natural consequence. So perhaps it's our conditioning that determines our opinions and not necessarily a reasonable distinction between what is right and what is wrong.


_________________
happily reclusive


SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

03 Jan 2010, 5:14 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Sand wrote:
Well, maybe there are better uses for these monsters than lopping off their heads. Someone that far gone should be eligible for major nerve system modification. Let the researchers at them to see what radical surgery or psychological conditioning can do. Maybe that will benefit some body of knowledge as to how mutable people can be. Something along the lines of "The Clockwork Orange" without a reprieve.

Going by Clockwork Orange are you sure about the ethics of that even?


They played that movie at an old classic cinema near to where I was living about 10 years ago. Anyhow I only saw maybe the first 5 minutes of it because it looked like the lady was about to be raped or something like that. And I didn't want to see that so I had to get up from my seat in the front row and walk out past all the people! lol But not before I verbally abused the crowded theatre of people for not walking out with me! I just couldn't understand how anyone could sit there and watch that. Perhaps I was just being overly-sensitive. Oh well.
So anyhow, I didn't read the book and I can only judge the movie on approximately the first 5 minutes. And it didn't seem to be portraying a very healthy standard of ethics.


_________________
happily reclusive


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Jan 2010, 5:25 am

SporadSpontan wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Sand wrote:
Well, maybe there are better uses for these monsters than lopping off their heads. Someone that far gone should be eligible for major nerve system modification. Let the researchers at them to see what radical surgery or psychological conditioning can do. Maybe that will benefit some body of knowledge as to how mutable people can be. Something along the lines of "The Clockwork Orange" without a reprieve.

Going by Clockwork Orange are you sure about the ethics of that even?


They played that movie at an old classic cinema near to where I was living about 10 years ago. Anyhow I only saw maybe the first 5 minutes of it because it looked like the lady was about to be raped or something like that. And I didn't want to see that so I had to get up from my seat in the front row and walk out past all the people! lol But not before I verbally abused the crowded theatre of people for not walking out with me! I just couldn't understand how anyone could sit there and watch that. Perhaps I was just being overly-sensitive. Oh well.
So anyhow, I didn't read the book and I can only judge the movie on approximately the first 5 minutes. And it didn't seem to be portraying a very healthy standard of ethics.


You've got to see the damage before you can appreciate the remedy. It was not a film approving sadism.



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

03 Jan 2010, 5:29 am

Well I'm happy to hear there was a remedy!


_________________
happily reclusive


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

03 Jan 2010, 5:36 am

SporadSpontan wrote:
Well I'm happy to hear there was a remedy!


I doubt it. Read this:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066921/synopsis



SporadSpontan
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 354
Location: pleasantly surprised to find myself here

03 Jan 2010, 6:07 am

Well thanks for that - as crazy as that stuff is, it's good to see there was an actual plot reason for those violent scenes.
And as for the remedy - I have two problems with it. 1) Two weeks is too brief to bring about a lasting change to ingrained attitudes. And 2) The mental training should involve positive thoughts/images rather than habituating the person to even more violent ones.


_________________
happily reclusive


Wombat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2006
Age: 76
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,051

03 Jan 2010, 8:16 am

I don't mind killing people. Just make sure you have the right guy.

If some pervert likes raping/torturing/killing little girls what should we do with him? Keep him in the slammer for 60 years or hang the bastard?

If I was Der Fuhrer I would have a list of people called "not fit to live".

If you do something really nasty then hasta la vista baby.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,505
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

03 Jan 2010, 11:00 am

SporadSpontan wrote:
The argument I'm making is not that keeping them alive does no more harm than the tax dollars. It's much much more than that. What it does for us as a society - to keep people like this around - is it makes us a humane society. So for no other reason than that it is worth it. And IMO that is a very very great reason.

While I'm touched by your optimism on the value of human life and being a humane society, my opinion on keeping these people alive is that it makes us weak; ie. we can send our military service members into places when it comes to our country's defense, somehow life of an enemy combatant is worth less in that position (whether they're on one hand fighting for a cause or on the other hand - conscribed), and something far more reprehensible we feel the need to keep alive because we need to show how merciful we are; it seems like it would be a sign of a markedly confused society.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,505
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

03 Jan 2010, 11:03 am

Sand wrote:
Basically these people have thrown away their basic decent humanity and deserve little sympathy. Their death contributes little to humanity. This could could contribute much, much more. The only major glitch in the logic is the frightfully corrupt and distorted legal procedures now in operation which surely has convicted innocent people because the district attorneys are not motivated by truth but by victories in conviction. Legal corruption and incompetence destroys the rationality of the whole concept.

I guess I'd have to figure out where they'd get such measures of neurological health and competence back that their slave labor would contribute staggering amounts to the world. Its not to say it couldn't happen, its just that in bending and breaking a person you are creating a lot of problems that when you try to clean it up its like trying to fix damaged fiberglass.