Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,421 Year: 3,678/9,624 Month: 549/974 Week: 162/276 Day: 2/34 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Theocracy alive and well in Utah (and considerations of the death penalty)
John
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 62 (56256)
09-18-2003 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by TheoMorphic
09-18-2003 12:17 AM


Re: hypothetical
quote:
hypothetical situations can be used to argue anything
Indeed. When I wrote what I did to crash, I was hoping for the response I got-- "but maybe he had a twin or someone just looked exactly like the guy I know." That sort of thing. It is the creation of scenarios unsupported by evidence. In other words, it is the falling prey to unreasonable doubt. It there is reasonable doubt, the accused should not be convicted at all. If unreasonable doubt is acceptable then there is no way to convict anyone of anything.
quote:
but our judicial system doesn't allow for a scale of confidence.
Yes, it does. It is called 'reasonable doubt.'
quote:
where would the cut off point be in certainty be?
Where is it now?
The problem, of course, is that every case is different. There really is no way to draw a line. This is the reason for a jury trial instead of trial by the judge or some other officer. The idea is that if the jury reaches consensus, that is the best we can do-- not that I do not have objections to much of the process.
But where is the cut-off? Obviously there is such a thing. Crash claims there is not and that is the point to which I object. Take Dahmer-- bodies in the fridge. It is hard to get more certain. Crash, it seems to me, would propose a whole string of objections to cast doubt. "Maybe the police planted the evidence." "Maybe some other person is the killer and was using Dahmer's apartment." "Maybe..." It really is the casting of unreasonable doubt. Scenarios with no evidence don't count.
quote:
i think cash is right in that in the real world the death penalty just doesn't work.
That may be, but not in all cases for the reasons crash proposes.
quote:
just like communism...
Lol... I am pretty sure we'll get there eventually, but it isn't going to happen by revolution and it isn't going to happen anytime soon. It will take a mental change, not a political one. That is another topic anyway, and it is just a guess. It is one of those things which make me want to live a thousand years, just to find out it works the way I expect.
quote:
on a bit of a different topic, i see the judicial system as a means to protect society first and foremost.
Absolutely.
quote:
punishment isn't really a means to protect society unless it's used as a form of rehabilitation.
This I can't accept. Sequestering criminals protects the rest of us, whether rehabilitation is a result or not.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by TheoMorphic, posted 09-18-2003 12:17 AM TheoMorphic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by TheoMorphic, posted 09-18-2003 2:39 PM John has replied

  
TheoMorphic
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 62 (56303)
09-18-2003 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by John
09-18-2003 11:01 AM


Re: hypothetical
quote:
Yes, it does. It is called 'reasonable doubt.'
what i mean is there is no scale that goes from innocent to guilty with different point in between. the jury doesn't say "probably guilty" or "probably not guilty" or "innocent" or "not guilty". The only options they have are guilty and not guilty.
The problem comes when you have a distinction between a conviction because there is no reasonable doubt, and a conviction because there is absolute certainty. there is a huge difference between absolute certainty and no reasonable doubt. You can never say "well that just isn't feasible" with absolute certainty.
quote:
This I can't accept. Sequestering criminals protects the rest of us, whether rehabilitation is a result or not.
so separating criminals from society protects society... but that says nothing about ending the criminal's life. any form of punishment beyond their separation from society is unwarranted unless it is used to rehabilitate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by John, posted 09-18-2003 11:01 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by John, posted 09-21-2003 11:33 AM TheoMorphic has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 48 of 62 (56307)
09-18-2003 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by John
09-18-2003 9:57 AM


I'd consider that the case anyway. I fail to see why life in prison is considered the more humane option.
Because you can let them out. Duh.
If they've served 20 years and then you find out you made a big mistake, you can let them out. Sure, they've lost 20 years and that totally sucks, but man, that's still way better than having to tell their family that you executed them by mistake. At least they still have the rest of their life left.
Yes it is. So is life in prison.
Again, you can let someone out halfway through their sentence. You can't undo the death penalty.
If the issue hinges on the irreversibility of captital punishment then by the same logic, you should require absolute knowledge if you are going to remove someone's dignity forever.
There's an enormous difference between dignity and life. Dignity can be found once it has been lost. Life cannot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by John, posted 09-18-2003 9:57 AM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by John, posted 09-21-2003 11:34 AM crashfrog has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 62 (56777)
09-21-2003 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by TheoMorphic
09-18-2003 2:39 PM


Re: hypothetical
quote:
what i mean is there is no scale that goes from innocent to guilty with different point in between.
We do have a scale of charges, however. One could be charged with manslaughter, or with first or second degree murder.
quote:
The problem comes when you have a distinction between a conviction because there is no reasonable doubt, and a conviction because there is absolute certainty.
There is no absolute certainty with anything. I can't be absolutely sure that I am typing right now. So it is really a moot point. Absolute certainty is impossible. That is why I consider it special pleading.
quote:
so separating criminals from society protects society... but that says nothing about ending the criminal's life.
No it doesn't. It wasn't intended to address the issue. It was a specific response to a specific statement you made.
quote:
any form of punishment beyond their separation from society is unwarranted unless it is used to rehabilitate.
This is a conclusion issued without argument.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by TheoMorphic, posted 09-18-2003 2:39 PM TheoMorphic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by TheoMorphic, posted 09-21-2003 3:03 PM John has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 62 (56778)
09-21-2003 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by crashfrog
09-18-2003 3:16 PM


I expected better of you, crash. The only reason I have for posting is the feedback. "Duh!" is pretty useless feedback.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by crashfrog, posted 09-18-2003 3:16 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by crashfrog, posted 10-07-2003 12:45 PM John has not replied

  
TheoMorphic
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 62 (56791)
09-21-2003 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by John
09-21-2003 11:33 AM


Re: hypothetical
john writes:
This is a conclusion issued without argument.
The primary purpose of the justice system is to protect innocent civilians. the secondary purpose of the justice system is to rehabilitate criminals so that they can rejoin society. in my opinion the justice system should not be used to punish criminals for punishment's sake. therefore, any punishment that does result should have the goal of rehabilitation (i.e. any form of punishment beyond their separation from society is unwarranted unless it is used to rehabilitate). the death penalty does not have the goal of rehabilitation, so is unwarranted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by John, posted 09-21-2003 11:33 AM John has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by sidelined, posted 09-21-2003 3:30 PM TheoMorphic has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 52 of 62 (56794)
09-21-2003 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by TheoMorphic
09-21-2003 3:03 PM


Re: hypothetical
Theomorphic I think the fact that we accept laws as a means of maintaining order says a lot about the level of civilization we live in.On the other hand I cannot honestly state that I would adhere to civility were it one of my children who had been killed.This is coming from a man whos daughter was sexually assaulted by her step-dad.There are days when my daughter is angry at me for not having taken matters into my own hands.
There are days when I am even angrier at myself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by TheoMorphic, posted 09-21-2003 3:03 PM TheoMorphic has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Rei, posted 09-21-2003 6:38 PM sidelined has replied

  
Rei
Member (Idle past 7034 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 53 of 62 (56814)
09-21-2003 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by sidelined
09-21-2003 3:30 PM


Re: hypothetical
I understand where you're coming from, sidelined - I truly do. But you have to put emotion aside and look at the big picture. Of the 12 states in the US with the death penalty, only 2 are in the top 25 of the murder rate. In fact, of the other 10, they're mostly toward the bottom of the lowest 25 murder rates. The lowest murder rate in the US, Iowa is of course a state without the death penalty. So, if the goal is deterrence, it's clearly not working. Clearly the goal isn't rehabilitation. The only other option is revenge. But the justice system is not for revenge. It is for safety. We have to keep that in mind. Killing a murderer won't bring his victims back.
------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by sidelined, posted 09-21-2003 3:30 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by sidelined, posted 09-21-2003 11:14 PM Rei has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 54 of 62 (56844)
09-21-2003 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Rei
09-21-2003 6:38 PM


Re: hypothetical
Rei I do put emotion aside. If I did not the discussion of what to do with people who take a life would literally include me.The thing with being atheist is that I do not hold that the man will "get what is coming to him"and so I allow him to live through acceptance of my humanity.Revenge will not change what happened but I have days where I could find satisfaction in its implementation.
As for the big picture,years ago,I read a book on war poetry by a soldier named Wilfred Owen.There are passages that I often remember because they dealt with the actual gritty aspects of conflict between individuals who are soldiers but ,more to the point, are human first.
Insensibility
I
Happy are men who yet before they are killed
Can let their veins run cold.
Whom no compassion fleers
Or makes their feet
Sore on the alleys cobbled with their brothers.
The front line withers,
But they are troops who fade, not flowers
For poets' tearful fooling:
Men, gaps for filling
Losses who might have fought
Longer; but no one bothers.
II
And some cease feeling
Even themselves or for themselves.
Dullness best solves
The tease and doubt of shelling,
And Chance's strange arithmetic
Comes simpler than the reckoning of their shilling.
They keep no check on Armies' decimation.
III
Happy are these who lose imagination:
They have enough to carry with ammunition.
Their spirit drags no pack.
Their old wounds save with cold can not more ache.
Having seen all things red,
Their eyes are rid
Of the hurt of the colour of blood for ever.
And terror's first constriction over,
Their hearts remain small drawn.
Their senses in some scorching cautery of battle
Now long since ironed,
Can laugh among the dying, unconcerned.
IV
Happy the soldier home, with not a notion
How somewhere, every dawn, some men attack,
And many sighs are drained.
Happy the lad whose mind was never trained:
His days are worth forgetting more than not.
He sings along the march
Which we march taciturn, because of dusk,
The long, forlorn, relentless trend
From larger day to huger night.
V
We wise, who with a thought besmirch
Blood over all our soul,
How should we see our task
But through his blunt and lashless eyes?
Alive, he is not vital overmuch;
Dying, not mortal overmuch;
Nor sad, nor proud,
Nor curious at all.
He cannot tell
Old men's placidity from his.
VI
But cursed are dullards whom no cannon stuns,
That they should be as stones.
Wretched are they, and mean
With paucity that never was simplicity.
By choice they made themselves immune
To pity and whatever mourns in man
Before the last sea and the hapless stars;
Whatever mourns when many leave these shores;
Whatever shares
The eternal reciprocity of tears.
I am lucky in that the the color of red can still hurt my eyes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Rei, posted 09-21-2003 6:38 PM Rei has not replied

  
doyle
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 62 (59862)
10-07-2003 4:09 AM


Sometimes death can be the more humane sentence.A year or so ago a Inmate sentenced to two life sentences without parole was shipped into the Institution.As a Corrections Officer,the garbage men of the justice system,it is detrimental to the performance of your job to feel compassion for the convicted felones.But this young man of 20 years with his baby face and the sheer panic in his eyes as he entered the dormitory really got to me.His crime was savage but still my heart went out to him.Terrified of his surroundings and the other Inmates that shared the dormitory,it took a little coaxing to get him to finally enter his assigned cell while his cellmate was present.Fortunatelly his cell mate was a decent individual but other Inmates in the dorm were attracted to his baby face and could smell his fear.Several of them swarmed to him as flies to honey.In a few days the fear was replaced by depression and eventually a unsuccessful suicide attempt was made.
His situation had to be compared to a literal Hell on Earth.This 20 year old kid with 50 or so years ahead of him was faceing 50 or so years in a disease infected environment with convicted preditors.Freedom and choices had been permanently takened from him with his sleeping,wakeing,eating and the clothes he wears being decided by someone else.He was doomed to this fate until the day he departed inside a hearst with toes sticking straight up.

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Dan Carroll, posted 10-07-2003 12:52 PM doyle has not replied
 Message 58 by TheoMorphic, posted 10-07-2003 2:58 PM doyle has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 56 of 62 (59932)
10-07-2003 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by John
09-21-2003 11:34 AM


The only reason I have for posting is the feedback. "Duh!" is pretty useless feedback.
Sorry, in retrospect I guess that was rather dismissive.
But it seems obvious to me that life in prison is more humane than death. There's always the hope of release, especially if you're innocent. I was surprised, then, for you to say that you couldn't see that life in prison was the more humane option.
This isn't assisted suicide we're talking about, after all. We're talking about killing people who don't want to be killed. What's in the least humane about that? Life is always more humane than an unwanted death.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by John, posted 09-21-2003 11:34 AM John has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 62 (59934)
10-07-2003 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by doyle
10-07-2003 4:09 AM


I agree with you that the situation in prisons is deplorable. But that doesn't mean the solution is to kill people. It means we need to fix the prisons.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by doyle, posted 10-07-2003 4:09 AM doyle has not replied

  
TheoMorphic
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 62 (59961)
10-07-2003 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by doyle
10-07-2003 4:09 AM


doyle writes:
Sometimes death can be the more humane sentence.
perhaps sometimes, but should our justice system be responsible for deciding what the person would rather have? like crashfrog says, life in prision leave open the possibility to still be set free. the death penality does not.
and to sidelined:
i'm sure there are situations in which i would like to see people die for causing pain to people who are close to me. But emotions should not be the arbitrator for right and wrong. subjective emotions will produce an increadibly inconsistent system of justice. There are way too many variables for law enforcement, and the justice system to operate in a fair manner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by doyle, posted 10-07-2003 4:09 AM doyle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by sidelined, posted 10-07-2003 3:46 PM TheoMorphic has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 59 of 62 (59971)
10-07-2003 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by TheoMorphic
10-07-2003 2:58 PM


TheoMorphic
"emotions should not be the arbitrator for right and wrong. subjective emotions will produce an increadibly inconsistent system of justice"
We who have a justice system in place are certainly bound to adhere to that law if we expect to reap of its benefits.When the injustice occurs to my offspring it is a whole other thing to find the strength to adhere to the principle.
I wonder though ,in places where the rule of law is violence and degradation, how anybody maintains the grip on a concept of justice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by TheoMorphic, posted 10-07-2003 2:58 PM TheoMorphic has not replied

  
doyle
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 62 (60043)
10-08-2003 2:53 AM


Rehabilitation!But here in the real world,you cannot rehabilitate those that do not wish to be rehabilitated.There are a few but that number is greatly over shadowed by the majority who view with regret only the fact that they were caught.
But these violent,anti social,untrust worthy human beings share the same gene pool as we ourselves.The potential was always there for us to follow the same course.But it was the exposure to a somewhat functional family as a child which made the difference in what course we chose.
It's not the rehabilitation of the convicted felon we seek because by the time these persons are convicted of their crime it is normally to late for rehabilitation.These persons must be saved years before as unloved and neglected children.Here is the time where real changes in the direction of ones life can be made.
Dealing with Inmates over the years one thing I have found that most of them have in common is the fact that they are the products of dysfunctional families.Many carry the physical scars of child abuse upon their bodies and almost all carry the mental scars.

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by sidelined, posted 10-08-2003 3:58 AM doyle has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024