1. Post #81
    OvB
    Facepunch resident scientist
    OvB's Avatar
    March 2007
    18,494 Posts
    I'm okay with state mandated killings of convicted serial killers. I view it as a moral grey area that's neither good or bad. Like war, or killing for defense. I don't think we should use it as much as we do, but in some cases like this dude it's probably for the best.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Android Chrome United States Show Events Starred Starred x 10 (list)

  2. Post #82
    then i would argue you have an issue not dissimilar to Dylann's.
    how does he have an issue similar to dylann's
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United States Show Events Starred Starred x 13 (list)

  3. Post #83
    Svinnik's Avatar
    June 2013
    11,791 Posts
    Life in prison in solitary confinement is pointless for the taxpayer. Why allow him to keep on sucking up resources that could be better used for prisoners that have a chance?

    He deserves death for what he did and his being a martyr shouldn't be a concern. Remember that he tried to reach out to other white supremacist groups but no one wanted to help him coordinate the shooting, why would people idolize a person that they themselves rejected?

    Sometimes you have to kill someone in return for the heinous actions they did. Look at the case of Eichmann. Why should he have been allowed to keep on living?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United States Show Events Starred Starred x 2 (list)

  4. Post #84
    RobL's Avatar
    May 2011
    1,476 Posts
    I know some people are going to disagree with him being put to death, but I'm sorry the guy deserves it. He's fucking evil, saying he wasn't sorry and was glad to do it. Given he stated he wasn't insane and decided to defend himself, he essentially was asking to be put to death.
    What does 'deserve' actually mean? Always seemed like such a nebulous thing to me
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  5. Post #85

    July 2014
    2,130 Posts
    yeah, because killing someone should never be seen as some clinical procedure devoid of emotional input. you're ending a human life. how can you possibly try and remove emotion from that debate?

    regardless of the emotion involved: killing for killing is not correct. there are no two ways about it.
    Except it is a clinical procedure. That's how the carrying out of a sentence works in criminal justice. We're ending somebody's life who had no hesitation to end the lives of 9 innocent people who were minding their own business and who injured another person in the process-- we're not killing a harmless or innocent person here, and it's startling to see the inability of so many people to understand this.

    Why is it not correct? That's a matter of opinion to say that it isn't, not fact. Your opinion doesn't matter here.

    One could use the same points for an opposing argument, though. A couple of questions to consider to acknowledge this argument:
    Do we really need to execute someone if they're no longer a danger to the public?
    Why DO we execute someone if they commit a heinous crime? What's the reasoning? Revenge?

    I for one see execution as unnecessary and a waste of money. Not because I'm overemotional, albeit I am concerned about the morals of the procedure, but because the reasoning that has been explained to me doesn't convince me. The prison system was designed to keep dangerous individuals out of society. Is there a difference if someone's alive in a cell or executed? I feel it shouldn't make a difference, as long as they're not seen from or heard of again, but pushing the death penalty just takes it to an unnecessary point. I say just drop em in a cell for the rest of their life and forget about em.
    Two things:

    1) Just because a person is in prison does not mean that they are "no longer a danger". They can still harm people who work in that prison and who have to take care of them, they can harm other inmates, they can even escape and harm others in the process. A lot of people seem to have trouble understanding this for some reason, including you. "Is there a difference if someone's alive in a cell or executed?" Is that a serious question?

    2) We execute them to reaffirm the value of the life of their innocent victims, and to reaffirm the value of civilized human life in general (in other words, normal people who don't run out and commit indiscriminate mass murder). We do it to demonstrate that there are severe consequences for killing innocent people. We do it to ensure that the perpetrator will never be an issue to anybody ever again; once they're dead you don't have to worry about them being a threat, you don't have to waste time and resources caring for them, etc. We also do it as a comforting mechanism for the families of victims, to show them that the person who killed their loved ones is gone forever.

    The prison system was designed to separate the problematic individuals from the ordinary, law-abiding ones. It exists to rehabilitate and also to punish offenders.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 8.1 Firefox United States Show Events Starred Starred x 5 (list)

  6. Post #86
    Duck M.'s Avatar
    August 2013
    4,824 Posts
    Life in prison in solitary confinement is pointless for the taxpayer. Why allow him to keep on sucking up resources that could be better used for prisoners that have a chance?
    Again, why is taxpayer money a primary concern in this? Why are we taking a pragmatic approach to an ethical issue?

  7. Post #87
    Judge, Jury, & Executioner
    Rusty100's Avatar
    September 2005
    68,052 Posts
    how does he have an issue similar to dylann's
    a lack of empathy with those he views as beneath him. a bloodlust he justifies to himself. the want to see another human dead.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  8. Post #88
    RobL's Avatar
    May 2011
    1,476 Posts
    it's done, get over it. also it's what the victims want
    Punishment aren't decided by the victims, and for good reason
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 7 (list)

  9. Post #89
    Gold Member
    Johnny Guitar's Avatar
    January 2012
    4,669 Posts
    I can see why you got demodded now. Stating your own opinions as facts is pretty laughable btw.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply iPhone Safari Canada Show Events Starred Starred x 10 (list)

  10. Post #90
    Judge, Jury, & Executioner
    Rusty100's Avatar
    September 2005
    68,052 Posts
    I can see why you got demodded now. Stating your own opinions as facts is pretty laughable btw.
    if you're interpreting my opinions as fact, that's on you. i said it, it's an opinion. i believe it's right, that's why it's my opinion.
    i was demodded due to inactivity.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome Show Events Starred Starred x 17 (list)

  11. Post #91
    Again, why is taxpayer money a primary concern in this? Why are we taking a pragmatic approach to an ethical issue?
    pragmatism is one approach to ethical issues
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United States Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  12. Post #92
    Tabasco Lord
    Arc Nova's Avatar
    September 2005
    13,729 Posts
    i was demodded due to inactivity.
    67,961 posts. Time between your last mod action and your own ban = 4 months. VNL is more inactive than you and still has mod and her last mod action was 7 months ago.

    (User was banned for this post ("off topic?" - Craptasket))
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome Canada Show Events Starred Starred x 9 (list)

  13. Post #93
    Gold Member
    Johnny Guitar's Avatar
    January 2012
    4,669 Posts
    regardless of the emotion involved: killing for killing is not correct. there are no two ways about it.
    Yeah definitely not stating opinions as facts.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply iPhone Safari Canada Show Events Starred Starred x 9 (list)

  14. Post #94
    Duck M.'s Avatar
    August 2013
    4,824 Posts
    pragmatism is one approach to ethical issues
    Thats true, but I'd argue that determining the fate of a human life on the basis of how much taxpayer money their punishment will cost is the wrong way to go about justice.

  15. Post #95
    CatFodder's Avatar
    August 2010
    1,300 Posts
    Yeah definitely not stating opinions as facts.
    Could you just mentally add 'in my opinion' to the start of every post in this thread so the discussion can carry on please.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 14 (list)

  16. Post #96

    July 2014
    2,130 Posts
    then i would argue you have an issue not dissimilar to Dylann's.
    And you'd be wrong. That's a common overdramatic gesture to wheel out in these debates, "Well then you're just as bad as he is!" Doesn't work that way. Until I go out and murder a bunch of innocent people for no reason, then no, I'm not as bad as he is. I mind my own business, I abide by the law, and I don't kill innocent people.

    Your inability to distinguish right from wrong and innocence from guilt is disturbing, and I'm not sure we should be listening to you and your opinions with that in mind.

    also do you see how maybe disregarding the rest of the world and only seeing what happens in america of any importance might be a really narrow way of thinking?
    This is not only an overly-simplistic view of things, it's also presumptuous as hell. How do you know how I feel about law and order in Saudi Arabia? How do you know that I "only see what happens in America to be of any importance"? My point was simply that Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with this conversation. It was stupid for you to try and drag it into it in the first place.

    We're talking about Dylann Roof, what he did, and his sentence. That's it.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 8.1 Firefox United States Show Events Starred Starred x 11 (list)

  17. Post #97
    Svinnik's Avatar
    June 2013
    11,791 Posts
    Again, why is taxpayer money a primary concern in this? Why are we taking a pragmatic approach to an ethical issue?
    because the ethical issue doesnt exist in a vacuum. It will ultimately cost more money to feed and house Roof while giving him psychological services than just killing him and being done with him.

  18. Post #98
    Thats true, but I'd argue that determining the fate of a human life on the basis of how much taxpayer money their punishment will cost is the wrong way to go about justice.
    as long as resources are limited, the taxpayer cost must figure into the discussion. though it may not be necessarily palatable to discuss it in such ways, that does not change the reality of the situation

  19. Post #99
    Judge, Jury, & Executioner
    Rusty100's Avatar
    September 2005
    68,052 Posts
    And you'd be wrong. That's a common overdramatic gesture to wheel out in these debates, "Well then you're just as bad as he is!" Doesn't work that way. Until I go out and murder a bunch of innocent people for no reason, then no, I'm not as bad as he is. I mind my own business, I abide by the law, and I don't kill innocent people.

    Your inability to distinguish right from wrong and innocence from guilt is disturbing.
    it's a good thing I didn't say you're as bad as him then isn't it? i said you have a problem that isn't dissimilar as his. i didn't say you were guilty of murder or as bad as him. but i see some inklings of a common line of thought.

    This is not only an overly-simplistic view of things, it's also presumptuous as hell. How do you know how I feel about law and order in Saudi Arabia? How do you know that I "only see what happens in America to be of any importance"?
    because you said that?

    I don't care what Saudi Arabia does. It's their country, and it's their business.
    if that's not what you think, cool. i misinterpreted your words. but you can see how that happened, right?

    67,961 posts. Time between your last mod action and your own ban = 4 months. VNL is more inactive than you and still has mod and her last mod action was 7 months ago.
    if u want to accuse the mod team of being dishonest then it's your call
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  20. Post #100
    JXZ
    JXZ's Avatar
    May 2012
    1,079 Posts
    because you said that?
    could you show me where, i think i missed it

  21. Post #101
    Duck M.'s Avatar
    August 2013
    4,824 Posts
    because the ethical issue doesnt exist in a vacuum. It will ultimately cost more money to feed and house Roof while giving him psychological services than just killing him and being done with him.
    as long as resources are limited, the taxpayer cost must figure into the discussion. though it may not be necessarily palatable to discuss it in such ways, that does not change the reality of the situation
    The cost that he and other death row prisoners is ultimately insignificant and hardly worth factoring into the discussion. Even less when considering that capital punishment also has costs associated with it.

  22. Post #102
    Blazedol's Avatar
    March 2013
    5,484 Posts
    because the ethical issue doesnt exist in a vacuum. It will ultimately cost more money to feed and house Roof while giving him psychological services than just killing him and being done with him.
    no, the cost for death row is really fucking expensive, even with the system we have now, and a rehabilitation focus prison would actually cut prison cost significantly

    so if money's your concern, then you should be supporting rehab
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Chrome United States Show Events Starred Starred x 7 (list)

  23. Post #103

    July 2014
    2,130 Posts
    it's a good thing I didn't say you're as bad as him then isn't it? i said you have a problem that isn't dissimilar as his. i didn't say you were guilty of murder or as bad as him. but i see some inklings of a common line of thought.
    What's the point of bringing that idea up then if you aren't trying to argue that I'm just as bad as he is. "You aren't dissimilar to him" is a very disingenuous way to word things. Also, are you a psychologist or a psychiatrist? I ask because you're seeing things that aren't actually there, and I seriously hope you don't have any power to be making decisions about people's mental health states, personalities, etc.

    What's it like hunting for similarities between mass murderers who have been sentenced to die for their crimes and random people on the Internet anyway?

    because you said that?
    Because they have no relevance lol.

    if that's not what you think, cool. i misinterpreted your words. but you can see how that happened, right?
    I'm still more caught up on the fact that you're trying to bring them into this conversation when they haven't got any relevance here. Again, we're talking about Dylann Roof, his crime, and his sentence-- that's it.

    Edited:

    no, the cost for death row is really fucking expensive, even with the system we have now, and a rehabilitation focus prison would actually cut prison cost significantly

    so if money's your concern, then you should be supporting rehab
    This isn't actually true when compared against life without parole. LWOP ends up costing more in general because prisoners can easily spend decades there (compared against most death row inmates; the cases you hear about where they've been awaiting execution for 15 or 20 years are exceptional) before the die of old age, and then there's tens of thousands of dollars in expenses accumulated as they require geriatric care.

    Not that money should be the primary concern of the criminal justice system anyway. It should be about maintaining law and order.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 8.1 Firefox United States Show Events Starred Starred x 3 (list)

  24. Post #104
    Gold Member
    Jamsponge's Avatar
    October 2009
    8,261 Posts
    My stance on the issue is fairly simple, honestly: Nobody should be allowed to kill anybody else unless it is to directly prevent other deaths. (eg shooting someone who is charging at someone else with a knife or assassinating a terrorist leader who cannot be made to submit). I think we should be very careful with who we say it's 'okay' to kill, and I don't think we should be murdering people who have been rendered effectively harmless to the public through incarceration.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 8 (list)

  25. Post #105
    CreeplyTuna's Avatar
    September 2013
    384 Posts
    Except it's not. I don't care what Saudi Arabia does. It's their country, and it's their business. They're not relevant here.

    Meanwhile, as an American, I'm fine with the execution of mass murderers. It does not bother me in the slightest to see Dylann Roof die.
    You won't see it. By the time he dies your kids could have gone through multiple schools, and you won't care or know. He might as well rot in prison for the rest of his life.

  26. Post #106
    Gold Member
    Ganerumo's Avatar
    September 2011
    27,969 Posts
    then i would argue you have an issue not dissimilar to Dylann's.
    I think this kind of reasoning is short-sighted and fails to see the importance of social constructs in how people perceive death.

    The reason there even is a debate regarding the death penalty is because we spend our lives being told that murder is wrong, so with a little bit of critical thinking it takes someone all of two seconds to see the connection between an execution and murder, and that's how opinions regarding the death penalty are built.

    Being apathetic to death isn't some kind of moral or mental issue. It's in rivalry with how we are conditioned to hate the concept of people killing each other, but that doesn't make it an "issue" by default.

    I think the whole issue with a lot of people advocating the whole "death penalty is never wrong" concept is that they fail to see this entire aspect of our minds that we only see murder as wrong because we spend our lives in an environment that antagonizes the idea, not because it's natural for us to hate murder.

  27. Post #107
    Plate Phelps's Avatar
    March 2012
    223 Posts
    Two things:

    1) Just because a person is in prison does not mean that they are "no longer a danger". They can still harm people who work in that prison and who have to take care of them, they can harm other inmates, they can even escape and harm others in the process. A lot of people seem to have trouble understanding this for some reason, including you. "Is there a difference if someone's alive in a cell or executed?" Is that a serious question?

    2) We execute them to reaffirm the value of the life of their innocent victims, and to reaffirm the value of civilized human life in general (in other words, normal people who don't run out and commit indiscriminate mass murder). We do it to demonstrate that there are severe consequences for killing innocent people. We do it to ensure that the perpetrator will never be an issue to anybody ever again; once they're dead you don't have to worry about them being a threat, you don't have to waste time and resources caring for them, etc. We also do it as a comforting mechanism for the families of victims, to show them that the person who killed their loved ones is gone forever.

    The prison system was designed to separate the problematic individuals from the ordinary, law-abiding ones. It exists to rehabilitate and also to punish offenders.
    In response to those arguments:

    1) People take jobs in high security prisons with the expectations of being able to handle dangerous inmates. They need the skills to be able to handle dangerous inmates, and while injuries do happen, it's part of the job in dealing with criminals. Being a prison guard is the same sort of job as being a police officer. They are not civilians. You take the job knowing the risks, but you also want to benefit society by keeping things under control. Perhaps, if you feel this strongly about the issue, you could argue for putting all the money blown in the death penalty appeal process towards R&D for better means of injury prevention (protective uniforms, therapies and programs to understand someone's violent tendencies, etc) in effort to make the guards' jobs easier. Or should we just execute everyone in maximum security prisons so the guards don't have to worry anymore? There really isn't any way around working with dangerous people.

    2) In response to fugitives, this is very rare. People generally don't escape maximum security prisons where such dangerous criminals are kept. This article states that there are only 10.5 escapes to each 10,000 inmates. Most escapes are among minimum security prisons and a lot of reports are inmates not showing up to their jobs. And prison escape has been on a downfall for years.

    3) "We also do it as a comforting mechanism for the families of victims, to show them that the person who killed their loved ones is gone forever."
    But this is not what the justice system is designed for. It tosses money towards an unneeded extreme. Ending a life as an effort to comfort someone is basically the definition of revenge. Revenge is defined as: to inflict hurt or harm on someone for an injury or wrong done to (someone else). It plays on emotion, which was your first argument against being anti-death penalty. It's applying an overemotional reaction to the situation. And that's contradicting your previous argument, the point I was trying to make.

    5) ""Is there a difference if someone's alive in a cell or executed?" Is that a serious question?"
    Yes, it is. I'm asking how it matter, because either way, they're away from everyone else. I'd rather you try asking yourself "what's the difference if they can't hurt me or my loved ones in either state?"
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United States Show Events Starred Starred x 2 (list)

  28. Post #108
    Proudly supporting the JIDF
    Dennab
    July 2010
    26,985 Posts
    numerous attempts have been made to civilise the act of execution and to dress it up in a great deal of legal garments and rituals which give it the superficial appearance of being distinct from just killing somebody. given that the justice system is not infallible i struggle to see why we should accept the risk of killing innocent people

    effort has gone into expressly laying out how to conduct an execution, but ultimately there's no real difference between giving somebody a last meal, having a priest talk to them, and giving them a lethal injection and that of simply caving in their skull with a large rock
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  29. Post #109
    Gold Member
    Ganerumo's Avatar
    September 2011
    27,969 Posts
    numerous attempts have been made to civilise the act of execution and to dress it up in a great deal of legal garments and rituals which give it the superficial appearance of being distinct from just killing somebody. given that the justice system is not infallible i struggle to see why we should accept the risk of killing innocent people
    How about cases where there is literally no chance of a wrong sentence ?

    effort has gone into expressly laying out how to conduct an execution, but ultimately there's no real difference between giving somebody a last meal, having a priest talk to them, and giving them a lethal injection and that of simply caving in their skull with a large rock
    Psychology is a big enough thing that those things matter for everyone involved, more than you're claiming.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome France Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  30. Post #110
    Proudly supporting the JIDF
    Dennab
    July 2010
    26,985 Posts
    How about cases where there is literally no chance of a wrong sentence ?
    yet there's been numerous examples of innocent people falsely accused and executed?

    Psychology is a big enough thing that those things matter for everyone involved, more than you're claiming.
    you're still doing the same thing in the end. the only real difference is that these days people pretend (or try to pretend) that they aren't killing somebody

    putting somebody in a chair and killing them from behind a wall with a button is not really more civilised no matter how much people claim that it is
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 3 (list)

  31. Post #111
    Blazedol's Avatar
    March 2013
    5,484 Posts
    How about cases where there is literally no chance of a wrong sentence ?
    the ends don't justify the means.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Chrome United States Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  32. Post #112
    Tabasco Lord
    Arc Nova's Avatar
    September 2005
    13,729 Posts

    if u want to accuse the mod team of being dishonest then it's your call
    nah im just saying you weren't very inactive at all
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome Canada Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  33. Post #113
    Gold Member
    Ganerumo's Avatar
    September 2011
    27,969 Posts
    yet there's been numerous examples of innocent people falsely accused and executed?
    Never said it wasn't the case. I'm just asking what your opinion would be of a situation where there is no doubt, if you're so willing to put emphasis on the usual doubt surrounding these situations.


    you're still doing the same thing in the end. the only real difference is that these days people pretend (or try to pretend) that they aren't killing somebody
    You do realize this is something that happens to literally anything that human beings do, right ? From locomotion to eating to sheltering.

    Edited:

    There's good arguments for and against the death penalty but the problem I have with a lot of people being against the death penalty here is that they're basically just appealing to their own emotion without trying to think why they feel that way to begin with and lacking basic critical thinking.

  34. Post #114
    NoOneKnowsMe's Avatar
    June 2011
    355 Posts
    I am glad I live in a country where stupid practices like the death penalty don't exist.

    How about cases where there is literally no chance of a wrong sentence ?
    As long as humans are involved, there are always going to be mistakes. It's not like no one innocent was ever killed by the death penalty, even with a lot of safety measures, which should be more than enough of a reason to abolish it. Prove that the death penalty is going to be infallible forever. If you can't prove it and still want the death penalty, it shows that you don't care about the possibility of someone being innocent.

  35. Post #115
    Gold Member
    Ganerumo's Avatar
    September 2011
    27,969 Posts
    As long as humans are involved, there are always going to be mistakes. It's not like no one innocent was ever killed by the death penalty, even with a lot of safety measures, which should be more than enough of a reason to abolish it. Prove that the death penalty is going to be infallible forever. If you can't prove it and still want the death penalty, it shows that you don't care about possible innocents.
    It's pretty hard to make a mistake regarding the guilt of Dylann Roof in the murder of nine people

    Also I've said several times in the past (not necessarily in this thread) that I don't think the death penalty should even be considered if there's as little as an ounce of doubt. But in a situation with so many witnesses, hard evidence, confessions, so on and so forth, there is no mistake.

    Dealing in absolutes is hardly ever going to work out for you and death penalty is no different. I think a lot of people who have argued against the concept as a whole have failed to see that repeatedly and are very quick to point fingers and accuse people of condoning the executions of anyone for anything.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome France Show Events Starred Starred x 1 (list)

  36. Post #116
    Gold Member
    hexpunK's Avatar
    August 2008
    19,234 Posts
    Never said it wasn't the case. I'm just asking what your opinion would be of a situation where there is no doubt, if you're so willing to put emphasis on the usual doubt surrounding these situations.
    Yeah that all sounds well and nice "oh yeah we totally know you did it, no doubt". But you've just made an exception to a rule. And with exceptions comes loopholes. And with loopholes, innocent people will eventually be sentenced to death unjustly.

    How about we just don't kill prisoners, yeah? It's stupid expensive, does little to actually aid in the resolution of any crime and doesn't appear to work well as a deterrent any more so than a standard sentence as you're just going to sit on death row for decades contesting it even if there was 100% proof it was you.

    Removing people from society should be more than enough to solve the problem of "we have a killer somewhere around here". Short of a jail break, they're not going anywhere any time soon.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Firefox United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 4 (list)

  37. Post #117
    NoOneKnowsMe's Avatar
    June 2011
    355 Posts
    It's pretty hard to make a mistake regarding the guilt of Dylann Roof in the murder of nine people
    That's not even the point I was making, but at least you can be smug about your critical thinking. Who says you can be so sure about future cases? You have to write a law which says if someone deserves a death penalty or not. How can you be sure that the law you have written is going to be correctly applied in the future?

  38. Post #118
    Gold Member
    Ganerumo's Avatar
    September 2011
    27,969 Posts
    Yeah that all sounds well and nice "oh yeah we totally know you did it, no doubt". But you've just made an exception to a rule. And with exceptions comes loopholes. And with loopholes, innocent people will eventually be sentenced to death unjustly.

    How about we just don't kill prisoners, yeah? It's stupid expensive, does little to actually aid in the resolution of any crime and doesn't appear to work well as a deterrent any more so than a standard sentence as you're just going to sit on death row for decades contesting it even if there was 100% proof it was you.

    Removing people from society should be more than enough to solve the problem of "we have a killer somewhere around here". Short of a jail break, they're not going anywhere any time soon.
    How about situations where the prisoner has expressed the will to die ? Something which has happened in the past ?

    Also, bringing up the slippery slope fallacy is idiotic. I'm referring to a specific criteria and you're jumping the gun instantly.

    Edited:

    That's not even the point I was making, but at least you can be smug about your critical thinking. Who says you can be so sure about future cases? You have to write a law which says if someone deserves a death penalty or not. How can you be sure that the law you have written is going to be correctly applied in the future?
    Frankly if you need to rely on hypotheses instead of referring to very practical cases like this current one or this one then you're already going way too far off-tracks with your argument and you need to rethink your strategy wholesale.

    I think some of you are misreading all of this as some kind of asinine defense of the death penalty in its current state and as an overall concept when I'm really just criticizing your incredibly wonky positions and inability to remain consistent for one god damn second. Constantly moving the goalpost around and coming up with pointless rhetoric about hypotheses and misplaced philosophy is going to accomplish nothing short of making you look like you don't actually have anything to say.

  39. Post #119
    RobL's Avatar
    May 2011
    1,476 Posts
    Saying "I'm for the death penalty when it's clear the person can't be reformed/is guilty beyond doubt" is as meaningless as the classic "Communism is great in theory!"
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 2 (list)

  40. Post #120
    Proudly supporting the JIDF
    Dennab
    July 2010
    26,985 Posts
    Never said it wasn't the case. I'm just asking what your opinion would be of a situation where there is no doubt, if you're so willing to put emphasis on the usual doubt surrounding these situations.
    well generally the point of the law is that it applies equally. let's say you said "ok we have determined without a doubt this is the person" and go on to execute, how does once construct a law which permits this kind of execution while also excluding without a doubt the innocent?

    given that making a system which is unable to make a mistake is impossible we should do the next best thing, which is to assume a degree of error in the judgement. you can at least pardon an innocent man, one cannot pardon a corpse

    You do realize this is something that happens to literally anything that human beings do, right ? From locomotion to eating to sheltering.
    the reason i say it is because there's a lot of people who like to pretend that this kind of death is somehow in a special category because it might be "more just" or "less painful" when they haven't considered the fact that the punishment is still the same in the end

    it is the ending of a life, and the means by which you do it are irrelevant in the end if you consider that the result is identical in every instance
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 10 Chrome United Kingdom Show Events Starred Starred x 3 (list)