|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Right wing conservatives are evil? Well, I have evidence that they are. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Gotti Inactive Member |
This abortion/death penalty argument doesn't hold a lot of water with me, as a moderate who leans left. One could argue that In particularly heinous crimes, crimes which have a startling depth of evil, that the death penalty is warranted. That a society would take such a solemn, and weighty step, shows that society might actually value life. That is, it is willing to impose on itself the weightiest decisions in what it believes is an attempt to protect itself. I'm not talking about the question of whether deterrence is achieved, or the weight of evidence, just the core concept. Personally, I think about half to 2/3 of all death row inmates should be doing life without parole ... it's imposed a little injudiciously for my tastes. But if we had a system in which only those people who deserve death got death, it could be said as protecting life.
Here's an example that might illustrate why no DP would be anti-life. A multiple murderer gets sentenced to life without parole. He has no hope of ever getting out. Yet he still wants to live. What's to prevent him from killing others in prison? Being placed in solitary? That punishment could be seen as cheapening the life that was taken. Or could a more serious consequence be seen as protecting life? This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-10-2005 03:40 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pink sasquatch Member (Idle past 6023 days) Posts: 1567 Joined: |
I'm not talking about the question of whether deterrence is achieved, or the weight of evidence, just the core concept. But the impact of the death penalty is the core concept. If a society knows that the death penalty often results in the death of innocent suspects, AND provides no deterrant to heinous crimes by others - then that society is indeed practicing an "anti-life" method. (If I recall there have been studies showing that life imprisonment is more of a deterrant to crime than the death penalty.)
What's to prevent him from killing others in prison? Being placed in solitary? Death row is solitary confinement.
In particularly heinous crimes, crimes which have a startling depth of evil, that the death penalty is warranted. That a society would take such a solemn, and weighty step, shows that society might actually value life. Those enacting such things events as the Salem witchcraft trials and the Holocaust thought the same damn thing. They were committing some of the most anti-life acts in history - but hey, if it was all for the good of society, it must have been pro-life, right? Ignorance doesn't right wrongs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Gotti Inactive Member |
-----
">>>>If a society knows that the death penalty often results in the death of innocent suspects, AND provides no deterrant to heinous crimes by others - then that society is indeed practicing an "anti-life" method." --- first off, the DP does not "often" result in the deaths of innocents. These days, it is an extreme rarity and the appeals process takes so long that those times an innocent person is on death row, you see them walk out on appeal. This is good.After Illinois Gov. put a moratorium on DPs, many states began similar reviews of all their DP cases.This is appropriate, just as Jeff dahmer on death row is appropriate...----- >"death row is solitary confinement." ----- I realize this. My point was that life in prison is not, thus what is the increase in penalty for killing in prison w/o a DP? Solitary? Is that all????? I think that would cheapen the life of the victims who the killer killed in prison.This is not an abstract, killers kill in prison all the time. ------>"Those enacting such things events as the Salem witchcraft trials and the Holocaust thought the same damn thing."--- The point would have some validity if our court system was more arbitrary and capricious, resting on nothing more than superstition, fear, ignorance, evil and megalomania. If those attributes were the bedrock of case law, what they teach in law schools, and what prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, appellate courts, the Supreme Court all engage in every day, and if we didn't have a constitution, and if technology and science were absent in the courtroom, if we didn't have a concept of reasonable doubt ... so yeah, then it would be the "same damn thing"... I don't mind debating the points, I'm not a big fan of the DP, but if you can't even entertain a thought in which in some cases it might be legitimate and are going to pull out the Salem and Nazi hyperbole, then we best move on... (forgive my coding ability)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pink sasquatch Member (Idle past 6023 days) Posts: 1567 Joined: |
first off, the DP does not "often" result in the deaths of innocents. These days, it is an extreme rarity and the appeals process takes so long that those times an innocent person is on death row, you see them walk out on appeal. This is good.After Illinois Gov. put a moratorium on DPs, many states began similar reviews of all their DP cases.This is appropriate, just as Jeff dahmer on death row is appropriate... Well, the current rate of executions in the US is about sixty per year. The Illinois investigation you mentioned found that just over half of death row inmates were actually innocent, and they were exonerated. If I recall there was no reason to believe that Illinois' system was different from any other states' systems. If you make a few simple assumptions and do some quick math, you'll find it likely that a couple dozen people are wrongly executed each year (especially in places like Texas, where Bush did not institute the moratorium). A couple innocent people a month is not a "rarity".
My point was that life in prison is not, thus what is the increase in penalty for killing in prison w/o a DP? Solitary? Is that all????? I think that would cheapen the life of the victims who the killer killed in prison.This is not an abstract, killers kill in prison all the time. I would be interested to see the evidence you have correlating the presence of the death penalty in a state with a reduction in crime within prison. Until you show such evidence, your claim is "abstract".
The point would have some validity if our court system was more arbitrary and capricious, resting on nothing more than superstition, fear, ignorance, evil and megalomania... but if you can't even entertain a thought in which in some cases it might be legitimate and are going to pull out the Salem and Nazi hyperbole, then we best move on.. Our court system is, in part, capricious and resting on fear and ignorance. I would argue that is why black men are disproportionately executed in this country - fear and ignorance. Besides, I wasn't specifically referring to the US court system when I made my statement regarding Salem and the Holocaust. I was referring specifically to your apparently hypothetical ("a society") statement:
That a society would take such a solemn, and weighty step, shows that society might actually value life. That is, it is willing to impose on itself the weightiest decisions in what it believes is an attempt to protect itself. I'm not talking about the question of whether deterrence is achieved, or the weight of evidence, just the core concept. See what you stated there? It doesn't matter what the evidence is, or if deterrance is achieved, essentially as long as a society thinks they are doing the right thing for society, they are "pro-life", even if it means executing people based on "nothing more than superstition, fear, ignorance, evil and megalomania." After all, you yourself excluded "the weight of the evidence" from your argument. Don't accuse me of hyperbole when I demonstrate that your argument of a "core concept" that is "pro-life" has been the basis of some of the most horrific atrocities of human history. Absurd.
I'm not a big fan of the DP, but if you can't even entertain a thought in which in some cases it might be legitimate... And in specifically what cases is it legitimate, since you claim it is in "some cases"? What is the specific cut-off or criteria for when one is sentenced to death instead of life?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
So can other animals. You can use a tool. So can lots of other animals. quote: But you didn't answer my wuestion. How does being able to reason or use tools make you not part of nature?
But that's due to your religious view. quote: Why else would you view homosexuality as a very negative, unnatural thing that nobody should do or be, rather than something natural and normal that some people do and are? Also, you didn't answer this question from my post:
quote: So, even if it's rare, it's natural, correct? "Experience of the outside world" is EXACTLY what science is all about. quote: Meaning? No, not really. Meaning is something that comes from within, distilled from my culture education, ideas, and experiences. When seeking truth (with a small 't') about the natural world, I most certainly do use the scientific method, yes. It's the best way to learn the most while making the fewest errors. Now, if you are talking about Truth (with a big 'T'), then that is philosophy, and has little to do with nature. At least, it is not emperical; you can have any philosophy you want and it doesn't have to be based in reality, be logical, or testable.
No, that's just a philosophy that is all inside your own head. quote: Sure what you do matters to the natural world, but not why you do them. The Tiger doesn't care why you destroy his habitat, all that matters is that he doesn't have a place to live and hunt and breed, so he dies.
Why do you think animals function like robots? quote: So, when my cat rubs against me and taps at my hand with his paw, and doesn't stop until I pet him, is he being a robot? Does that desire for me to pet him have less meaning that an infant wanting his paren't touch? Why or why not? We have been selected by our environment to have great big brains that are capable of very complicated abstract thought, and also the means to communicate our thoughts to others. What about the human ability to think in complex ways makes us not part of nature?
quote: What makes you want to view all other life forms as inferior, rather than just different?
quote: ...and competitors, and preditors, and disease vectors.
quote: Why not? Why do you think that because we have these big brains which have allowed us to develop all of this technology to make our lives more comfortable that we are not also part of nature?
quote: Prophex, what does every living thing on Earth have to do to live?
quote: On The Other Hand.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Sorry, Schraf, if I offended you.
Unlike most gay guys I know, who can sometimes be ok with girls, I absolutely find them completely unappealing in a disgusting kind of way. You could call it a phobia. Even the smell of a girl makes me sick, literally. For example, just last week I had to leave my friend's room because there was a girl in there that smelled like a vagina. The straight guys in the room claimed that they liked the smell. I tried to endure it for about 10 and had to get up and leave. Girls have better personalities than guys, though This is why more of my friends are girls than guys.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Pretty much. The caveat is that its necessarily a broad term and so you do encounter "socially liberal conservatives" and so forth. But if someone is identified as right wing, or self-identifies, its a pretty certain bet that they will back the captains of industry against the mere masses.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: I understand that Bush signed over 120 death warrants. Given what we now know about his loose relationship to evidence, and propensity for seeing what he wants to see in the material, it seems a screaming certainty tbat some of those people were innocent, or perhaps should have had the penalty commuted.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Gotti Inactive Member |
Just to summarize my issue. I did not want to get into a debate on the merits of the death penalty since this has been hashed over so many times. All I really wanted to do was to question the notion that it's hypocritical to be pro abortion and anti death penalty.The reason I'm not giving a point-by-point rebuttal to your last post is because of that limited point I wanted to make, and because my coding abilities are bad, which really sucks right now as a new member. A couple of points though.
The error rate for Illinois' death penalty was found to be 4.5 percent, as far as innocent people being on death row. I agree, this is way too freaking high. A lot of media were reporting "half were exonerated." This is not the case. Half received unfair trials. It doesn't mean half were innocent. I don't doubt there were innocent people on death row there. So it's good the appellate system worked. It would not have worked under Salem Witch trials or Nazi Germany. When I made the statement - "I'm not talking about the weight of the evidence" - it was not an intent to say "the weight of the evidence doesn't matter," it was an attempt to limit the discussion to whether one could take the intellectual position that the death penalty is defensible in relation to the anti-abortion argument. I didn't want to get off on the usual tangents - such as "weight of evidence" so, looking back, maybe my "weight of evidence" statement wasn't clear. One could go back and forth ad nauseum about our court system - is it arbitrary and capricious? Is it the least worst human judicial system in the world. Is it better in New York than in Mississippi? Suffice to say that for all it's flaws - it is a human endeavor after all - it is monstrously huge step up from Salem. A simple question you raise, "What's the cutoff point" could be debated forever too. Here's what some states lay out as the "cutoff point" - which are actually jury instructions that jurors consider during the sentencing phase, after a guilty verdict is returned:" Was the victim a child; was the killing random? Were multiple people killed? Was the crime committed to cover up another felony? Was the crime committed in commission of a felony? Some of these cutoff points, I agree with. As a juror, I would have no problem sentencing Tim McVeigh to death. As a juror, if the state was arguing the murder occurred during a robbery of a 7-11 and thus, it was committed during another felony, I would probably argue for the life sentence to my other jurors. See, this could go on and on ... see the example below as to how this could expand: You write: I would be interested to see the evidence you have correlating the presence of the death penalty in a state with a reduction in crime within prison. Until you show such evidence, your claim is "abstract". This was a response to my assertion that being placed in solitary for a homicide might cheapen the life that was taken. In other words, I was merely making this limited argument. A man commits one murder, he is sentenced to prison for life. In essence, sent to his room forever. A man commits a second murder, what's the punishment, he is sent to a worse room? Does this cheapen the life of the second victim, I ask. And yet, from this simple notion, you are asking me to provide evidence "correlating the presence of the death penalty in a state with a reduction in crime within prison?" I don't know if such evidence would address my point that the life of the victim in the second murder was cheaper because the punishment was less severe. And I suppose I could spend hours looking for that evidence, and it might indeed exist. But for the limited purposes of my claim that "it happens all the time" what if I just do a Google search for the words "prisoner kills inmate." Why, there it is, I have to go all the way back to, lets see...way back in history to the date of March 21, 2005, a man from Grenada Mississippi kills another. If I do a Google search for "prisoner kills guard" I have to go back even further, to March 11, 2005 - the Atlanta incident. It isn’t the best research, I admit. But I submit my claim is not abstract. OK, my point is this. I can see an intellectual argument being made against the death penalty. If you come from the position that - even though you disagree with the death penalty - that the issue is a no brainer and there is no intellectual argument that can be made for it, then we're never going to be able to talk about the initial point reP/abortion.edit by PB This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-10-2005 03:35 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No, not at all. Makes no difference to me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
bump.
A reply to message #200 would be uch appreciated.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pink sasquatch Member (Idle past 6023 days) Posts: 1567 Joined: |
I can see an intellectual argument being made against the death penalty. If you come from the position that - even though you disagree with the death penalty - that the issue is a no brainer and there is no intellectual argument that can be made for it,then we're never going to be able to talk about the initial point reP/abortion. Again, the key issue: You've claimed that the death penalty is "pro-life" because, even though it involves taking a life, it benefits the "life" of the rest of society. The problem is, I haven't seen any evidence showing that the death penalty does benefit society at large; and there may be evidence showing the opposite, that the pratice of execution degrades society through "official" cheapening of life (in this case it would be anti-life in both individual and societal terms). Without such evidence it difficult to say if the practice is "pro-life" or "anti-life"; simply because society thinks that a barbaric practice benefits it as a whole does not make it "pro-life". If that was the case, sacrificing virgins would be a great "pro-life" practice in some cultural contexts...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Pinky writes:
A long time ago when I was in philosophy of ethics, I took it upon myself to argue for the other side of the debate. I came across a little piece of not-so-well known information that stumped everyone on my opponents' side. The problem is, I haven't seen any evidence showing that the death penalty does benefit society at large; and there may be evidence showing the opposite, that the pratice of execution degrades society through "official" cheapening of life (in this case it would be anti-life in both individual and societal terms).
This graph was put together by me. I took the data from that site on the picture. Basically, I supperimposed the two data together (one was for the homicide rate and the other one was for the number of execution). As you can see, there was a period in the 70's that all death penalties were halted by the supreme court. Coincidently, the rate of homicide sky rocketed at the same time. Anyway, I think the graph itself is pretty self explanatory. The two data seem to be a mirror image of each other. According to this little piece of info, it does indeed look like the death penalty does benefit society in the long run. I think I did pretty well playing the devil's advocate.
edited graph to fix page width - The Queen This message has been edited by AdminAsgara, 04-07-2005 04:04 PM This message has been edited by AdminPhat, 04-10-2005 03:47 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
What data do you have regarding the prevalence of non-death penalty violent crime, and also overall crime rates during the same period?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Interesting data. Do these correlations hold up when we examine the statistics for states with the death penalty? What do these trends look like in states that did not have the death penalty? Or perhaps you didn't compile those.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024