Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Death Penalty and Stanley Tookie Williams
wiseman45
Inactive Member


Message 76 of 166 (269257)
12-14-2005 1:51 PM


Policies on Execution
Here's my general policy on executing criminals:
1. Speediness needs to be improved. While its important to make sure that a criminal truly deserves to be executed...27 years on Death Row is just too long. Might as well give them life in prison if you're gonna do that.
2. They need to raise the rate at which executions are carried out, among convicted murderers, especially. Think about it. You want to kill somebody. But you know, if you're caught and convicted, you will die for that crime. Doesn't that seem like a good deterrent?
3. Death Row candidates can only be convicted on solid evidence, where its clear that they did it because they left their fingerprints or DNA at the crime scene or on a weapon.
Well, what do you think about that? 3 golden rules about Death Row. Wow. What an achievement.
This message has been edited by wiseman45, 12-14-2005 04:10 PM

I don't know any fancy proverbs, so if you expected one, go away

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-14-2005 3:10 PM wiseman45 has not replied

1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 77 of 166 (269258)
12-14-2005 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
12-12-2005 9:53 PM


payback is a bitch.
You get yourself convicted of murdering someone in the first degree or commiting a capital offense in Texas you are going to pay with your life. Period. I do not care how many books you write, or how rehabilitated you become. It is not about rehabilitation, it is about killing some asshole for killing other innocents. It is punishment. It is closer for the victims families. Payback is a bitch.

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 12-12-2005 9:53 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-14-2005 3:11 PM 1.61803 has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 78 of 166 (269270)
12-14-2005 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by crashfrog
12-14-2005 1:08 PM


Re: My changed mind
that I arbitrarily assign values of moral outrage to various moral outrages?
Wrong. The criticism is that you arbitrarily apply moral rules not values.
Especially when your entire argument rests on an arbitrary separation between "practical" and "theoretical."
Arbitrary is not simple name calling, it is a definition. When you invoke a rule in one instance and then refuse to use it in a similar instance, that is being arbitrary.
There is a difference between theoretical and practical realms.
if "practical certainty" is less certain than "theoretical certainty", then it cannot be absolute
You seem not to have grasped the point. In fact the above statement is itself indicative of the problem you are having. The term absolute does not have to refer to absolute in all other realms. You can have absolute practical certainty, and not absolute theoretical certainty.
The difference between the two is that the latter covers issues which have no practical value due to their implausibility. As long as you absolutely cover all issues that have practical value that is all that is necessary for worthwhile decision making.
It is not that practical certainty is less certain, it simply doesn't cover the issues that would not matter except in hypothetical worlds.
There's no compelling state interest in helping a man commit suicide while at the same time letting a real murderer go free.
Complicity to murder makes one culpable of murder which makes one a murderer. I'm not sure how much more clear I can get on this.
You are right that there is no compelling state interest in helping a man commit suicide and letting a murderer go free. The existence of the death penalty will only help a suicidal person who becomes a murderer through complicity get what he both wants and deserves.
Can I ask how not having the death penalty will change this, except to have the suicidal person charge police in a more overt fashion, rather than carefully crafting the evidence to let a murderer get away so as to go through an extensive legal process before dying?
If a person really wants to die at the hands of the state, the state can be compelled to oblige those wishes in other forms.
Are you going to offer argumentation for your opinion? My opinion seems perfectly self-evident.
I already did. And no your position is not self evident. You want to go back and find the old thread waiting for a reply, you go right ahead. Or open a new one. Detailing such a process has (as I have noted previously in this thread) been done already and is getting further and further off topic.
Why couldn't it? Show me that this situation falls outside of your arbitrary boundary for "practical", and that your arbitrary boundary doesn't a priori reject any outcomes that have actually occured.
Uh... I asked you a question. You can't dodge it by simply saying why couldn't it? As for your second sentence I didn't understand what you meant. And by the way no more "arbitrary" labels until you can use it correctly. Your use of it here didn't make sense and seems to be fitting a pattern of I use a term and you use it back with no real weight or meaning.
Circular reasoning: any doubt you can't eliminate is conviniently dismissed as "theoretical."
Whoa, that's note true at all. Philosophers discuss what they are covering. If you can't tell whether they are discussing theory versus practical decision making then it is likely you haven't read them.
Here's a really short example. You brought up brains in vats (BIVs). Theoretically we could all be BIVs, but that has no practical value if in our epistemic world we have a consistent experience that does not involve being BIVs at all. We would work within the rule systems of whatever world the mad scientist has devised for us as BIVs.
Thus you can practically decide to tie your shoe, and you can practically know that your neighbor is waving at you, and may even deduce that you are being waved at to get out of the road quickly, and so stop tying your shoe to avoid getting hit by a car.
In the real world of BIVs, there is no shoe, or car, and maybe not even a neighbor, but as far as practical reality goes for you they all exist and can be treated as existing. In fact most if not all would argue SHOULD be treated as if existing.
Solipsism if actually followed, is a pretty lonely and absurd place to be living.
So I hope this has helped you understand the very NONarbitrary line between theoretical and practical realms.
I would draw the tentative conclusion that that what you say occured actually did so.
I guess I don't really know you but I believe you are BSing me. If you actually held true to that form of tentativity there would be no reason to indict anyone for anything.
Let me ask you, if "appeared" to come up to you and stab you, would you honestly draw a "tentative" but not "practically certain" conclusion that someone actually stabbed you... and so not call the paramedics or police, and when the police caught a person, no matter how much he looked like the guy and happened to have a knife with blood which DNA sampling said "appeared" to match your blood, andthe guy even said that he was the one, you would not press charges because you couldn't be sure?
Its easy to play the game of claiming epistemological nihilism, but I really don't believe you live that way at all.
If you hold that you only engage in such epistemic nihilism when it comes to capital punishment, then you are playing a game with a double edge sword. As I already pointed out, in such theoretical worlds (as you wish to suppose) not killing is as good as going on a mass murder spree. All absurdities must be entertained and accepted. Indeed your moral "outrage" is meaningless.
Yeah, actually I'd like you to explain how you can create a scale of outrage or even appropriate punishment, if all is up in the air as you claim? BIVs are the annihilation of knowledge, not the way to cement a moral position.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by crashfrog, posted 12-14-2005 1:08 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by crashfrog, posted 12-20-2005 12:42 AM Silent H has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 79 of 166 (269273)
12-14-2005 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by 8upwidit2
12-14-2005 1:35 PM


Re: Give us some learning here....
Enlighten us all, what exactly is happening in the US now that is causing the "Worst periods in their history?"
Where are they holding you?
We suffered the worst attack on US soil in our history. That was followed by an intelligence failure of historic proportion. That failure involved us in a conflict which is unpopular and has wasted resources and is still not over and we know now will not accomplish the ends it was supposed to achieve. We went from a budget surplus back into major debt. During all of this we went through a major natural disaster which resulted in many more deaths because of poor planning and execution... which has been traced in no small part to mismanagement. The population is heavily divided and not working to repair that divide.
That would be "for starters" and accepting the Bush administration's position on what has occured.
With the exception of the Civil War, I guess I'd ask what period of time in US history was worse?
This message has been edited by holmes, 12-14-2005 02:27 PM

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by 8upwidit2, posted 12-14-2005 1:35 PM 8upwidit2 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-14-2005 3:25 PM Silent H has not replied

FliesOnly
Member (Idle past 4144 days)
Posts: 797
From: Michigan
Joined: 12-01-2003


Message 80 of 166 (269275)
12-14-2005 2:35 PM


I'm jumping in a bit late here, but there's nothing I can do about that now I guess.
I seem to come down on the death penalty a bit on the Holmes side of things. I have had many discussions with people on both sides of the issue and for my part; I have consistently stated that while I am in favor of the death penalty, it is most certainly not applied fairly. Neither ones race nor ones socio-economic situation should play a role in the type of punishment one might receive for a violent crime.
By the same token, I have no problem putting to death someone that was convicted of murder. But let me clarify when I think death is appropriate. Personally, I do not think that expert testimony should suffice one way or the other. Each side (Prosecutor and Defense) will always have their own expert witness who will try to convince a jury of a defendant’s guilt or innocence. The death penalty should only be applied in those most rare of circumstances where guilt is all but an absolute certainty.
Here’s a list of criteria I think should be met before the death penalty can be considered.
1) Multiple witnesses NOT connected to the crime in any way.
2) Overwhelming physical evidence (blood, hair, semen, etc) subjected to DNA testing.
3) At least one other nonhuman “witness” to the crime (video tape and/or audio tape).
4) A confession.
Numbers 3 and 4 can be substituted, one for the other.
For example, while the names and exact dates escape me, I’m sure most of us remember a few months back, the situation in Georgia (I believe) where a defendant being brought into the court room, grab a gun, killed the judge and I think another lawyer, fled, killed someone else while stealing their car, took someone hostage in their home, and then later surrendered to authorities. That, to me, is a classic example of guilt beyond doubt. Multiple witnesses, video tape, and a confession. So hells yes, hang the fucker.
By this own argument then, the death penalty would not have even been an option in the Stanley Williams case. To me, if realistic doubt exists, then the death penalty should be taken off the table.
And I also do not think juries should decide if a defendant is put to death or not. Look, a lot of our judicial system is more about theatrics than determining the guilt or innocence of someone. It’s not about right or wrong, it’s about winning. Juries can be swayed by circumstances unrelated to the actual evidence put forth. I have a close friend that served on a jury during a rape trial. They convicted the defendant. I talked to my friend (after the case had been decided) about what it was like and he confessed to me that one reason he personally voted to convict was how he “thought” the defendant handled himself on the stand. My friend said that he didn’t trust him and could “see it in his eyes”. I was a bit upset and told him so. I told him that I thought that that was a bullshit reason to send someone to jail for a number of years. “Cuz you didn’t like how he acted on the stand?” I asked, “That’s cappola.” I can only imagine what sort of shit goes on during a capital murder case.

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 81 of 166 (269283)
12-14-2005 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Silent H
12-14-2005 1:31 PM


Re: My changed mind
Dahmer was murdered and Hitler killed himself. Both events I might note happen to innocent people unjustly imprisoned (not that Hitler even reached that point).
If there are innocent people being executed, when that is the most carefully scutinized process of all types of legal cases there are, how many innocents are languishing in jail under the more oppressive conditions that you yourself outlined?
How many end up dying in prison?
i'm aware of their fates.
the thing about imprisonment is that it is reversable. no, you can't give them their time back, but they can be compensated. execution is a bit more final. further, very little prevents innocents from using the time productively... as a rather nasty sabbatical perhaps. clearly mr williams and many other people have done so (hitler being a rather nefarious example not of innocence but of constructive, if icky, endevour). yes, i'm sure many die in prison. just imprisoning everyone isn't the answer. we do need to overhaul the system as a whole, but i don't think execution should be a part of the new system. because i don't trust even a reformed system to be able to properly apply it. humans are flawed and exectution is too final.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Silent H, posted 12-14-2005 1:31 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Silent H, posted 12-15-2005 8:17 AM macaroniandcheese has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 82 of 166 (269285)
12-14-2005 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by wiseman45
12-14-2005 1:51 PM


Re: Policies on Execution
deterrence has been all but nullified in the case of capital punishment. it simply is a myth. it doesn't even seem to occur in non-capital crimes. stop discussing it. it's moot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by wiseman45, posted 12-14-2005 1:51 PM wiseman45 has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 83 of 166 (269286)
12-14-2005 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by 1.61803
12-14-2005 1:55 PM


Re: payback is a bitch.
*sigh*
forgiveness is a bitch, too.
i'm glad texas doesn't represent god.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by 1.61803, posted 12-14-2005 1:55 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by 1.61803, posted 12-15-2005 5:41 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 84 of 166 (269289)
12-14-2005 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Silent H
12-14-2005 2:27 PM


Re: Give us some learning here....
you said it much better than i could have.
but don't forget the overhaul that's being attempted on our constitution in the name of 'intent of the founders'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Silent H, posted 12-14-2005 2:27 PM Silent H has not replied

wiseman45
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 166 (269300)
12-14-2005 4:05 PM


suggest a good alternative
Okay, so maybe the death penalty does not serve as a deterrent. But what about the alternative? Sure. They spend the rest of their lives in prison. Usually, in some states, its seems that at least 75% of all criminals who get sentenced to life are parolled way before their life is over--some are even parolled when they're still young enough to hurt someone! All they have to do is lie to the parol board, and they're as free as a bird.
Meanwhile, I'm a proponent of criminals in this country having too many rights. Especially hard felons. It should be like this: all violent felons, nation-wide, should be locked up, 23 hours a day, with the remaining hour of yard time. No Tv. No forms of entertainment whatsoever. If they want to write down their thoughts or draw, they get a dull pencil and a pad of paper. Really bad food would be good too. For especially well-behaved cons, you could have it so they get more priveleges. They earn them. They don't get them.
Now that would be a detterent. If you know that killing someone gets you that kind of life, automatic upon conviction with 1 appeal if there is evidence to support it, then that should be it. You might think twice before you kill someone. Would you not? Probably once you initiated this system, and launched a PR campaign to back it all up, the crime rate would go down.
The reason I said what I did about crime can be fought with an iron fist via the death penalty is because in nations that have stricter justice systems they have lower crime rates. Its a fact of life. All I know is that SOMETHING has to be done about crime in this country--it is out of control, and even though we have very efficient police forces, the justice system is out of control, and in cities like LA you have one attempted armed robbery every 20 minutes with the police having to watch thier every move lest they risk legal action by some laywer claiming they're all racists or impeding on rights or whatever. As things stand, things in this country on saftey-wise ideas aren't going anywhere fast.
*sigh* I probably sound like an old cranky hermit.
This message has been edited by wiseman45, 12-14-2005 04:06 PM
This message has been edited by wiseman45, 12-14-2005 04:10 PM

I don't know any fancy proverbs, so if you expected one, go away

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-14-2005 4:44 PM wiseman45 has not replied
 Message 87 by pink sasquatch, posted 12-14-2005 5:11 PM wiseman45 has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 86 of 166 (269311)
12-14-2005 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by wiseman45
12-14-2005 4:05 PM


Re: suggest a good alternative
demonstrate this. show me stats that prove that heavier sentencing reduces crime. prove that it's not resulting from something else. i want hard science. then i'll believe your hard time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by wiseman45, posted 12-14-2005 4:05 PM wiseman45 has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 87 of 166 (269321)
12-14-2005 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by wiseman45
12-14-2005 4:05 PM


your alternatives are already in place
All they have to do is lie to the parol board, and they're as free as a bird.
"Life without parole" is already a sentence.
Where did you get your "75% of lifers are parolled way before their life is over" statistic?
It should be like this: all violent felons, nation-wide, should be locked up, 23 hours a day, with the remaining hour of yard time... No forms of entertainment whatsoever... Really bad food would be good too. For especially well-behaved cons, you could have it so they get more priveleges. They earn them. They don't get them.
You do realize that a whole range of prison types and types of wings within prisons already exist? You don't seem to be describing anything new.
Ever heard of "minimum" and "maximum" security prisons, as an obvious example?
The reason I said what I did about crime can be fought with an iron fist via the death penalty is because in nations that have stricter justice systems they have lower crime rates. Its a fact of life.
Fact, eh? Then please supply evidence.
*sigh* I probably sound like an old cranky hermit.
No, but quite frankly, you don't sound like someone who lives in the US or has any idea of the nature of prison life...
No Tv.
Yep. That will make it a living hell.
After all, right now prisons are like country clubs, what with all of the rape and gang warfare.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by wiseman45, posted 12-14-2005 4:05 PM wiseman45 has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 88 of 166 (269324)
12-14-2005 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by coffee_addict
12-13-2005 10:39 PM


IF rehabilitation is the question, plus a 3rd Option
An interesting graph, Lam, one that could easily be two results of a single trend or results of totally unrelated trends. To show a relationship you need to show reasonably exclusive causality, and this is not done by just posting numbers. But lets assume it is real for the moment.
This still does not argue against there being a mechanism to reduce the sentence from death to life if certain circumstances are met or where there is compelling evidence that the original decision was not biased or beyond reasonable doubt. At least with a life sentence it is possible for the prisoner to make a positive contribution. Perhaps it could be like a parole system: contribute, earn 5 years, review in 5 years. Letting a life sentenced prisoner choose death is also an option, so they would have three options: contribute and delay death, choose to die, or wait to let the system takes its course.
If we, as a society, are really committed to the concept of rehabilitation of criminals, then this actually occurring in prison should trigger some positive response in the justice system, regardless of the original sentence and crime.
It should be some relatively easy criteria to measure: {repentence\regret} could be one part, making a positive effect outside prison could be another, making a positive effect on other prisoners could also be included. Perhaps a 2 out of 3 goal for getting the 5 year delay would be sufficient.
I know that "The Birdman of Alcatraz" (Burt Lancaster movie, 1962) portrays Robert Stroud as a more gentle and humane individual than his early record shows, the real story still shows that it is possible for a person confined to a cell, under high security restrictions no less, to do valuable work that benefits society.
One difference to note between Tookie and Stroud is that Strouds contribution came after his sentence was commuted from death to life imprisonment.
Robert Stroud - The Birdman of Alcatraz
The issue about revenge for the crimes committed is, to me, a red herring, as neither death nor life imprisonment will change the past, both are punishments for the crime, but only one has the potential to change the future in a positive way.
Given that numerous prisoners have been put to death wrongfully (after being convicted wrongfully) it seems to me that it should almost be mandatory condition that the case be fully re-opened and the evidence - new and old - reviewed to ensure that (1) the right person was convicted and there are no problems with the evidence used, and (2) that the crime warrents the ultimate punishment. All possible elements of racial bias, economic bias need to be removed and the evidence judged fairly and equitably, perhaps by a panel of judges rather than a jury, so that they are familiar with the laws, and the failings of the current system. Again, if there were some doubt but not evidence of innocence then they could postpone it for 5 years to review again (a number of wrongfully killed prisoners were found innocent afterwards). This would be the final {review\appeal}, applied in all cases automatically (and probably reducing the paperwork now being processed in such cases ).
It seems to me that this would be a reasonable alternative to one or the other in all cases.
Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by coffee_addict, posted 12-13-2005 10:39 PM coffee_addict has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 89 of 166 (269325)
12-14-2005 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Silent H
12-14-2005 10:08 AM


expert juries
I think they'd be another interesting thread topic. I cannot give a simple up/down on that idea. What I will say is this: our current justice system is flawed and we should be seriously investigating alternatives, including such things as expert juries.
Yes another topic. One I have some misgivings about (do they become political appointments? shudder How could they be selected so that doesn't happen?)
Also consider the complete supression of the identity of the defendant - no race, gender, age, sex, etc information - judge only on the evidence and not on who it charged.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Silent H, posted 12-14-2005 10:08 AM Silent H has not replied

bobbins
Member (Idle past 3613 days)
Posts: 122
From: Manchester, England
Joined: 06-23-2005


Message 90 of 166 (269414)
12-14-2005 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Silent H
12-14-2005 10:35 AM


Re: Revenge
Sorry Holmes but what!!!
Of course being a Brit will lead me to be accused of many things (of which I am guilty of some), but killing citizens of Iraq, well no! My government does things I do not approve of, the invasion of Iraq being one. It is not my fault, nor any reflection on me that the current government has done the things that it has done. In the same way that you are not Bush and I do not accuse you of being a class A1 idiot. Of that I am sure.
Any attempt to deflect my criticism of a graph, which was dishonest in it's graphical representation of the facts, with childish nationalistic rebukes is, well, childish. Yes, I am proud of the non-capital nature of punishment in the UK, and the murder rates (as a proportion of all crime) over the last 40 years convince me of this.
As for the 'other' reason for capital punishment, removal of a threat to society. Surely on arrest the threat is already removed. As a reason for capital punishment it fell below my radar. Sorry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Silent H, posted 12-14-2005 10:35 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Silent H, posted 12-15-2005 8:03 AM bobbins has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024