Sleeper Cell Posted February 18, 2016 Posted February 18, 2016 36 minutes ago, Anijen said: Sorry, I do not understand your response; "murdered in prison." If they were killed by execution (death penalty) I would not label that as "murder." smac97 gave a very good response comparing murder and killing. I am against the death penalty because of wrongful conviction and also because sometimes the criminal might be guilty, but does not deserve the death penalty. Can you be more clear when you state; Murdered in prison by other prisoners.
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 (edited) On 2/18/2016 at 10:17 AM, strappinglad said: "It is better that they have a stone tied around their neck and drowned in the sea." Of course that is just a permissive liberal speaking, right? How do you know it is not talking about suicide? and why use religion in political debates? Our country is not a Christian nation, not a Muslim Nation, Not an Atheist nation, it is a secular nation that needs to be neutral on religion. Our country belongs to all of us, not to Christians only. Edited February 19, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian 1
strappinglad Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 (edited) On 2/18/2016 at 10:05 AM, TheSkepticChristian said: bytheway, what does Christianity teach? You asked the question $%^&#$. I answered it. ( promises self to stop hitting head against brick wall ) Edited February 19, 2016 by strappinglad 1
Bob Crockett Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 On 2/18/2016 at 4:57 PM, VideoGameJunkie said: Yes it would free up prison overcrowding. I think the hundreds of millions spent on separately housing capital felons, and for their legal defense, could be spent on better prison conditions if we abolished the death penalty on purely economic terms. Plus let out all the drug felons and legalize more drugs.
Meadowchik Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 I think it's less necessary with current laws and technology. We can, for example, separate convicted murderers from society without killing them. In other past times, or if that changed in the future, I think some against the death penalty would change their minds. 1
thesometimesaint Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 17 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: I think it's less necessary with current laws and technology. We can, for example, separate convicted murderers from society without killing them. In other past times, or if that changed in the future, I think some against the death penalty would change their minds. Virtually every convict will be released back into the community. The only real question is do we want them released better able to cope with the stresses that put them in when they went in, or worse.
Jeanne Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 After many years in prison, some on death row beg to die..that right there is the worse punishment of all. I think I am finding myself being against capital punishment. As unusual as it is, some victims have found a space of time that they offer forgiveness. Perhaps we are not offering some a chance to do that. Like I say..that is very unusual. I can toss all these feelings out though in a moment of anger towards one who hurts a child.
Meadowchik Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: Virtually every convict will be released back into the community. The only real question is do we want them released better able to cope with the stresses that put them in when they went in, or worse. I think you missed my point. Rehabilitation can occur under good conditions, which we have a chance at creating now. What happens, though, when you don't have the jail cells, keys, and guards? In other words, the suspension of capital punishment is a luxury we can enjoy when we have the resources to ensure the dangerous criminal remains separate from society. It cannot be an absolute policy, though, not if our aim is to protect the innocent. Edited February 20, 2016 by Meadowchik
thesometimesaint Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 9 hours ago, Meadowchik said: I think you missed my point. Rehabilitation can occur under good conditions, which we have a chance at creating now. What happens, though, when you don't have the jail cells, keys, and guards? In other words, the suspension of capital punishment is a luxury we can enjoy when we have the resources to ensure the dangerous criminal remains separate from society. It cannot be an absolute policy, though, not if our aim is to protect the innocent. Norway has a prison system very close to that, and its recidivism is a small fraction of ours. Plus they don't have the death penalty. So it is for our convenience and not the desire to rehabilitate that we have the death penalty.
carbon dioxide Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 (edited) 17 hours ago, Jeanne said: After many years in prison, some on death row beg to die..that right there is the worse punishment of all. I think I am finding myself being against capital punishment. As unusual as it is, some victims have found a space of time that they offer forgiveness. Perhaps we are not offering some a chance to do that. Like I say..that is very unusual. I can toss all these feelings out though in a moment of anger towards one who hurts a child. The only justice that a murderer could legitimately receive outside of execution is what they do in super max prisons. If murderers would get 23 hours a day in their cells and solitary confinement in a cell that is underground, then perhaps that is good enough. If they are not going to be executed, at least make their lives miserable. Edited February 20, 2016 by carbon dioxide
carbon dioxide Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 (edited) 11 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Norway has a prison system very close to that, and its recidivism is a small fraction of ours. Plus they don't have the death penalty. So it is for our convenience and not the desire to rehabilitate that we have the death penalty. Norway also sentenced a man to 21 years in prison for killing 77 people which comes out to about 3 months per victim. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/world/europe/anders-behring-breivik-murder-trial.html If someone murders my kids, I don't care about them being getting rehab. I want justice for my kids. If they don't get to live or to be free to walk the earth, so should the person who killed them should not be given that. Edited February 20, 2016 by carbon dioxide
thesometimesaint Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 2 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said: Norway also sentenced a man to 21 years in prison for killing 77 people which comes out to about 3 months per victim. If someone murders my kids, I don't care about them being getting rehab. I want justice for my kids. If they don't get to live or to be free to walk the earth, so should the person who killed them should not be given that. Yes they did, and he will never get out of that Norway prison except in a pine box. He was judged sane, but with serious mental health issues. SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik Two teams of court-appointed forensic psychiatrists examined Breivik before his trial. The first report diagnosed Breivik as having paranoid schizophrenia.[22] A second psychiatric evaluation was commissioned following widespread criticism of the first.[23] The second evaluation was published a week before the trial; it concluded that Breivik was not psychotic during the attacks nor during the evaluation.[24] He was instead diagnosed as having narcissistic personality disorder.[25]His trial began on 16 April 2012, with closing arguments made on 22 June 2012.[26] On 24 August 2012, the Oslo District Court issued findings that Breivik was sane, and guilty of murdering 77 people. He was sentenced to 21 years in prison, in a form of preventive detention that required a minimum of 10 years incarceration and the possibility of an extension of that incarceration for as long as he is deemed a danger to society. This is the maximum penalty in Norway; he will likely remain in prison for the remainder of his life. S\o your desire for vengeance will bring back your kids?
Meadowchik Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said: Norway has a prison system very close to that, and its recidivism is a small fraction of ours. Plus they don't have the death penalty. So it is for our convenience and not the desire to rehabilitate that we have the death penalty. Norway has a system like what? (I am familiar with it, but I still think you're missing my point.) Of course the death penalty is not about rehabilitation. Prison should be able rehabilitation, though, when possible.
thesometimesaint Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 1 minute ago, Meadowchik said: Norway has a system like what? (I am familiar with it, but I still think you're missing my point.) Of course the death penalty is not about rehabilitation. Prison should be able rehabilitation, though, when possible. SEE https://www.google.com/search?q=norway+prison+cell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 So it is about our convenience. Just kill them and make room for the next. Heck we could even make it an assembly line like Oklahoma and Texas.
Meadowchik Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 1 minute ago, thesometimesaint said: SEE https://www.google.com/search?q=norway+prison+cell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 So it is about our convenience. Just kill them and make room for the next. Heck we could even make it an assembly line like Oklahoma and Texas. WHO are you responding to??? And to what??? Like I said, I am familiar with Norway's. I've seen an in-depth documentary including interviews with the incarcerated.
thesometimesaint Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 6 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: WHO are you responding to??? And to what??? Like I said, I am familiar with Norway's. I've seen an in-depth documentary including interviews with the incarcerated. "Rehabilitation can occur under good conditions, which we have a chance at creating now. What happens, though, when you don't have the jail cells, keys, and guards?" Which do you see as the best chance for creating rehabilitation? SEE https://www.google.com/search?q=American+prison+cell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Meadowchik Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 11 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: "Rehabilitation can occur under good conditions, which we have a chance at creating now. What happens, though, when you don't have the jail cells, keys, and guards?" Which do you see as the best chance for creating rehabilitation? SEE https://www.google.com/search?q=American+prison+cell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 I was talking about not being able to safely keep dangerous criminals separate. When they are intent on killing and when one does not have the means to safely confine them, execution may be a necessity. Imagine a situation where someone is actively trying to kill but in circumstances where they cannot be contained indefinitely. In those cases, it's akin to self-defense. Therefore, my point was that nowadays we enjoy the luxury of being able to contain dangerous murderers when necessary, of not having to agonize through the moral hazard of killing. So when we can avoid it, let's avoid it. Rehabilitative incarceration is ideal. I believe that all society benefits from it.
mtomm Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 Knowing we've excuted innocent people makes me not supportive of the death penalty. Cost is another reason. Also, since it is carried about by us collectively (the state vs. John doe) I'm very uncomfortable having it done in my name.
bcuzbcuz Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 21 hours ago, carbon dioxide said: Norway also sentenced a man to 21 years in prison for killing 77 people which comes out to about 3 months per victim. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/world/europe/anders-behring-breivik-murder-trial.html If someone murders my kids, I don't care about them being getting rehab. I want justice for my kids. If they don't get to live or to be free to walk the earth, so should the person who killed them should not be given that. You seem to be equating justice with revenge. Your premise was, "If someone murders my kids". I have lost a child. Nothing, absolutely nothing, is fair or just about it. Absolutely nothing can be done to someone else to bring my child back or make the pain any less. The emptiness, the loss, the nightmares, the dreams of what might have been, never go away. Time does not heal all wounds. People who do evil things can be punished but it doesn´t wipe the slate clean. There is no justice. Capital punishment does not offer any peace to the psyche. I believe, in fact, that capital punishment removes the focus for the blame of the capital crime and replaces it with an amorphous, ghost like center of attention that creates an area of emptiness for those that survive. Capital punishment does not provide any sense of closure, in fact it gives the exact opposite. 1
thesometimesaint Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 20 hours ago, Meadowchik said: I was talking about not being able to safely keep dangerous criminals separate. When they are intent on killing and when one does not have the means to safely confine them, execution may be a necessity. Imagine a situation where someone is actively trying to kill but in circumstances where they cannot be contained indefinitely. In those cases, it's akin to self-defense. Therefore, my point was that nowadays we enjoy the luxury of being able to contain dangerous murderers when necessary, of not having to agonize through the moral hazard of killing. So when we can avoid it, let's avoid it. Rehabilitative incarceration is ideal. I believe that all society benefits from it. No society that I know of doesn't keep the dangerous separate. Capital Punishment is not self defense. Again according to you it is for your convenience to kill. How is that any different than the person about to be executed? Rehabilitative incarceration is far from ideal, but it is necessary. The ideal is for them to don't do things that got them incarcerated in the first place.
Meadowchik Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 16 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: No society that I know of doesn't keep the dangerous separate. Capital Punishment is not self defense. Again according to you it is for your convenience to kill. How is that any different than the person about to be executed? Rehabilitative incarceration is far from ideal, but it is necessary. The ideal is for them to don't do things that got them incarcerated in the first place. Are you deliberately pretending to not understand? Almost without fail, in your replies you seem to ignore what I actually say and then take the slightest of implications as my whole position. No, thanks! 1
thesometimesaint Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 1 minute ago, Meadowchik said: Are you deliberately pretending to not understand? Almost without fail, in your replies you seem to ignore what I actually say and then take the slightest of implications as my whole position. No, thanks! I'm trying to understand. REALLY.
Meadowchik Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 (edited) 20 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: I'm trying to understand. REALLY. Then go back and read again. I clarified several times, being largely in agreement with your apparent wishes for rehabilitative incarceration, and then you re-label what I say. This seems more like partisan bickering to me. Would it kill you to appreciate the common ground we stand on? Edited February 21, 2016 by Meadowchik 1
Jeanne Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 After an execution, we have often heard victims say "I expected to feel better..or ease the pain"..but I don't think that works either.
thesometimesaint Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 35 minutes ago, Meadowchik said: Then go back and read again. I clarified several times, being largely in agreement with your apparent wishes for rehabilitative incarceration, and then you re-label what I say. This seems more like partisan bickering to me. Would it kill you to appreciate the common ground we stand on? One of my many shortcomings is that I don't always understand even the clarification. But I do try. I too favor rehabilitation. Morality aside; it costs a lot less money in the long run in that it turns liabilities into assets. Unfortunately some very few will never, in this life, become assets. For those very few prison is the only option. Even there I think it is incumbent on us the treat them humanely. It says more about us that it does about them when we don't. I do appreciate any common ground we can arrive at. But always agreeing with anyone is kinda boring. 1
Recommended Posts