|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 05/07/2008 : 13:19:36 [Permalink]
|
bngbuck wrote: | The core problem is the undoubted premeditated murder mindset, calculating killer with no hint of insanity, (in the legal sense), and for whose crime there is abundant unquestioned valid evidence - and an exceedingly small possibility that a forensic error has occured in his/her conviction. And the crime must be horrendous - cruelty, sadism, utter lack of mercy or normal human consideration of life value. Murder for greed, profit, power, convenience (unwanted mate or child), infanticide, repeated rape and murder, etc. Probably a serial killer with motive for each consecutive rape and murder. |
Many mental disorders would not qualify as legal insanity, but people who have them aren't monsters. You keep suggesting that we who are against the death penalty are applying mystical reasoning, but your dehumanization of these people reminds me of equally irrational ideas used to justify all sorts of atrocities.
If someone commits crimes under your above description, they most certainly do have some sort of mental disorder. Maybe something they were born with, maybe developed, or a little of both, but as you said it – “utter lack of mercy or normal human consideration of life value.” Not normal. And sadly, some such disorders have little to no cure, so full rehabilitation isn't going to happen. This doesn't mean we have to exterminate these people. The horrible things people have done can't be undone. But they can be prevented from doing them again. They can also do good things, even if it is to simply live out the rest of their human life, reading, writing, working out, or just jerking off. There is no good reason to kill them – not economic, not for deterrence, and plenty of reasons to avoid having a legal system with the authority to execute incarcerated individuals. So why do it? Dave is right, the only motivation left is revenge, and that is no good reason.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
 |
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
 Posted - 05/08/2008 : 12:25:06 [Permalink]
|
Marf I.....
| When we have zero good reasons to have the death penalty in the first place, one innocent life taken by the state is enough of a reason to not have it. |
It seems to me that we have as good reasons to have and employ a death penalty for unquestioned hideous crime perpetuators as we have good reasons for killing a dog that bites a person, a lion or tiger that becomes a man-eater, a rogue elephant, or any animal (lesser animal) that severly irritates, hurts, or offends a human being!
I specifically ask for your Critically Reasoned opinion on this exact issue, Marf!| A person is more than the crimes they have committed, even if those crimes are extraordinarily heinous. Also, a life in a cell is still a life which can be appreciated. Human beings have an amazing ability to adapt to limitations, such as quadriplegics who after a couple years of adjustment end up just as happy on average as everyone else. And I can't imagine a cell more limiting than being unable to control most of one's body. |
| A person is more than the crimes they have committed, even if those crimes are extraordinarily heinous. |
And is a dog (or Cat) more than a momentary flash of instinct overcoming training (or perhaps reason, even)? ...or are the "lesser" animals , including the primates, somehow basically, inherently different than we, undoubtedly superior in SOME way, human animals?| Also, a life in a cell is still a life which can be appreciated. |
Is a life in a cage also a life that can be appreciated?| Human beings have an amazing ability to adapt to limitations, such as quadriplegics who after a couple years of adjustment end up just as happy on average as everyone else. And I can't imagine a cell more limiting than being unable to control most of one's body. |
Most animals have such adaptive abilities, witness domestication of various species for man's pleasure and appetite! So, better we cage the vicious dog, the man eating tiger, the trampling elephant, even a psychotic ferocious gorilla, chimp or bono - rare, but it has happened - for the rest of their natural lifespan? Or are these particular examples of life "different" in some exalted qualitative way fom the life of a Human (caps intended)?
Marf I am obviously asking you to describe what the magic is that occurs in the evolutionary process and suddenly defines a human primate as somehow qualitatively different than a chimp, gorilla, orangatang, or bonobo; or perhaps a dolphin, whale, parrot, elephant, dog, pig........etc.? And completely transforms the moralistic and ethical parameters that define the way a human animal may ethically deal with fellow animals?
On to other matters.....
| Also, prison should be a place of reform, not merely a cell. Especially for prisoners who are going to be out in society again some day. But really for all of them, since they are all human beings. |
Marf, your idealism is refreshing, admirable, but so naïvely innocent, I have to wince. I bolded your word "should" to contrast the wish with the reality. You know the recidivism rate, Marf! Society cannot dare risk the release of many of those "monsters" (think Hannibal Lecter) because the mind sciences are still a long |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2008 : 13:57:50 [Permalink]
|
Marf II.....
| This doesn't mean we have to exterminate these people. The horrible things people have done can't be undone. But they can be prevented from doing them again. They can also do good things, even if it is to simply live out the rest of their human life, reading, writing, working out, or just jerking off. There is no good reason to kill them – not economic, not for deterrence, |
In countries with limited resources and nowhere near the riches of America, an argument could be made that society can not financially afford to support criminal monsters for life. That money is needed for the law-abiding, non-murderous citizens (including victims of the murderers) to survive!
In the prosperous U.S. we can afford to house, feed, and attempt to rehabilitate these fringe members of society, but if McCain and big-business Republicans in Congress prevail this fall, we may soon find that our economy is so strained by the trillions needed to satiate corporate greed in this country, that there is no money available for either the needed reforms or even the maintenence of our existing prisons! You can bet that a Republican Administration and Congress will suck all the discretionary funds out of any budget and apply it to the highly profitable war business!
Look, Marf, I don't really disagree with you and others regarding capital punishment. I have played the devil's advocate here purposely here to elicit thoughtful comments like yours, Kil's and Dave's concerning this complex ethical/practical issue. I think some good reasoning has emerged from this thread, and like many others, I have benefitted from the exchanges.
I am quite serious in my effort to disentangle the ethical confusion that I see regarding many freethinkers view that there is an enormous qualitative gap between the non-human animal population of the world and the Human population.
This gap is reflexively recognized by theists and defined as the possession of a soul. You, I, and most others here understand this to be nonsense. But what rational concept replaces this irrational soul and entitles us humans to treat - and eat - animals, all animals, as , well animals?
You have no ethical problem in eating the flesh of cows and pigs and birds, etc. Would you have an ethical problem eating the flesh of a chimpanzee killed for food consumption? Or a dolphin or dog?
There may be an analogy in the abortion conundrum. To abort a weeks-old fetus for any legitimate reason is perfectly reasonable.
To abort a near term eight and three quarter month old embryo is quite another matter and raises serious ethical questions! Even seven month embryos have survived birth! So this brushes dangerously near a definition of murder!
Where on the continuum does one draw the ethical line? By trimester, month, week, day, or second? Can there be any doubt that putting a knife into the heart of a newborn one second out of the womb is murder? Or that D&C or MVA in the first weeks of fetal development is not murder?
How about a hysterotomy abortion at the end of the second trimester?
Or the third week of the third trimester? Is it murder?
Applying the same logical continuum evaluation to the sentience continuum of animal life, at what point do we properly apply ethical standards that apply to all members of the particular group of animals whose sentience we have decided is X degrees inferior to we Humans? Like Primates (us excluded, of course) Or Mammals (well, we gotta make some exceptions of course. Dog meat ain't as good as bacon, except in Korea, and things like that!) All fish are OK (obviously we will not have to deal with dolphins, here) Fuck the reptiles, only crazy folks like Filthy like those ugly bastards, besides a lot of 'em are mean and deserve to die!
But you see what |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2008 : 08:58:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Dave.....
... I think what I am driving at here is that a court-appointed lawyer may well be lacking in sufficient persuasion skills to sway a jury, but it takes an O.J. Simpson to afford a dream team that can turn a jury upsidedown. I would hazard a guess that most capital punishment offenders have had poor legal representation. And this would be a large factor in evaluating whether a person charged with a capital crime on ambivilant evidence should ever receive the death penalty.
|
Another reason to abolish the death penalty. There is no equality. You have money, you don´t die, you´re poor, you´re screwed. |
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2008 : 09:01:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Dave.....
Here we are talking about an undoubted murderer with enough evidence to convict even if he didn't have any legal representation, so the quality of the lawyering is moot. Not a bad lawyer, just an unnecessary lawyer. Lawyer quality becomes very important when considering those convicted with inconclusive evidence.
|
There are lots of those |
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 05/09/2008 : 13:07:18 [Permalink]
|
perrodetokio.....
| Another reason to abolish the death penalty. There is no equality. You have money, you don´t die, you´re poor, you´re screwed. |
and Yeah, Perro, you're dead right and what have I just said? | I would hazard a guess that most capital punishment offenders have had poor legal representation. And this would be a large factor in evaluating whether a person charged with a capital crime on ambivilant evidence should ever receive the death penalty. |
| Yes, I agree with this. The criminal justice system is terribly flawed and seriously needs the funding and the pubic and government interest needed to establish a focused attention of science on improving every aspect of criminal justice - apprehension, judgement, methods of punishment, incarceration, and - of course - the validity of the death penalty. |
Look, Perro, re-read my last two posts addressed to Marf. I have essentially stated that I agree with you and her and most here on the enormous error potential inherent in the death penalty. I am persuaded by the cogent arguments presented here that there is too much room for error in allowing the State to take anyone's life who has not been absolutely fairly convicted with excellent legal representation and an overabundance of overwhelming evidence.
And I further agree that these "perfect" cases are far and few between. So I'm with you on the lack of accuracy of capital punishment - too high a risk of error in most cases to justify a death penalty. At least for the foreseeable future of the mind sciences and the progress of the justice system! Also, it appears at first blush that it costs more to execute than to imprison!
But, hypothetically, Perro, what is your view on the rare situation (there certainly have been some) where the proof of guilt is perfect, there is no way to deny the evidence, the accused has confessed his guilt, in addition to overwhelming, multiple eye-witness evidence, and the perp is a cold-blooded premeditated multiple murderer with full awareness of right and wrong, high intelligence, who has killed repeatedly for money, not sex or passion.
An example would be a financial advisor who repeatedly ingratiates himself with elderly clients until he cleverly manipulates their money into his control using bogus bank accounts and investments, then murders them so that a portion of their estate passes into his hands. He successfully perpetrates this murderous scam on a number of old, lonely people and then is apprehended, he has made serious mistakes in the killings, the evidence (DNA, fingerprints, a witness or two) is completely compelling and he confesses - boasting about his cleverness and states repeatedly that when he gets out he will repeat the crime!
What is the rationale for life imprisonment, other than cost?
In any event, what is your view of the difference between executing animals who commit inexcusable offenses against humans, sometimes with the apparent reason for the behavior being simply survival instinct; as opposed to executing dangerous human criminals who are almost certain to kill again if not restrained?
Worst possible hypothetical example - an extremely clever trained chimpanzee with a human IQ of about 70, fully as intelligent as an 8 year old child, who becomes psychologically deranged by stress (chimpanzees do lose it sometimes when highly stressed) and accidentally kills his trainer, a beloved human companion?
Or even a lowly wild wolf who kills a human for food and is captured - not rabid or sick - just hungry! Should the chimp or the wolf be summarily shot....... or incarcerated? Why do you answer the way that you do?
How about a response to the animal rights thing from Marf? Or the Olympians - Dave or Kil -- or Mabuse down in the foothills of Sweden? How about OY, Vey?, or the Harp from Hell, Dude or Furshur's views on errant primate execution - are you your brother's keeper, Fur?
Filthy, I infer from your excellent posts on the odd fauna of this world, that you are something of an animal lover, as am I. What is your opinion on the issues of animal abuse and execution that I have raised here and earlier?
Let's hear deduction from the fraternal sibling of the seer of 221B Baker Street, Mycroft, a brief note from Ricky or Hummer - Hummer, I promise not to call you Hummer for a while, Hummer, if you'll just deign to shred me to slivers again! It's been a while! Thanks, Hummer!
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 15:04:56 [Permalink]
|
Michelle.....
Kil wrote (in another thread):
Michelle loves abnormal psychology, and serial killers certainly fit that description. I can't wait to turn her on to the story. |
Michelle, What's your view of how the justice system should deal with - today, not in the future - fairly convicted serial killers?
If you decide to answer, read this thread first! I would be seriously interested in your views on these two subjects (both of them)!
Few others here showed much interest! Go figure!
|
| Edited by - bngbuck on 05/11/2008 15:31:36 |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 15:17:40 [Permalink]
|
Kil (and Michelle).....
| Despite the vicious nature of her crimes, her last few years were spent ministering to prisoners and guards alike. Barfield was heavily involved in Christianity, to the point that some tried to get an appeal for her life after noticing the changes[citation needed]. The appeal was denied, and Barfield was executed on November 2, 1984 at the Central Prison in Raleigh, North Carolina. |
Justice, or cruel and unnecessary punishment? |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 17:34:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Kil (and Michelle).....
| Despite the vicious nature of her crimes, her last few years were spent ministering to prisoners and guards alike. Barfield was heavily involved in Christianity, to the point that some tried to get an appeal for her life after noticing the changes[citation needed]. The appeal was denied, and Barfield was executed on November 2, 1984 at the Central Prison in Raleigh, North Carolina. |
Justice, or cruel and unnecessary punishment?
|
I don't care if she was a model inmate who definitely committed the crimes she was sentenced for. Where it comes to capital punishment, I couldn't care less about her behavior in prison.
I oppose the death penalty for the same reasons that I gave earlier in this thread. And I really can't think of a scenario that would change my mind about that other than perhaps feeling the need to extract vengeance based on the killing of one of my own family members. But then, that is why we don't allow family members to decide such things. (That is not to say that vengeance isn't in the heart of some juries, which is one of the reasons I oppose capital punishment.)
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
froydnslp
New Member
22 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 19:22:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Michelle.....
Kil wrote (in another thread):
Michelle loves abnormal psychology, and serial killers certainly fit that description. I can't wait to turn her on to the story. |
Michelle, What's your view of how the justice system should deal with - today, not in the future - fairly convicted serial killers?
If you decide to answer, read this thread first! I would be seriously interested in your views on these two subjects (both of them)!
Few others here showed much interest! Go figure!
|
Well, I was asked for my comments on a 2 very big subjects, so here's my attempt.
I don't support the death penalty for allllllll the various reasons that have been listed. Seems to me that it is very much like the animal examples you have inserted here, Buck. I think that we (society, not me personally) really don't know what to do with animals (monsters) that kill. Killing is bad, right? So killing an animal (monster) that killed is bad. That seems simple enough.
Personally, the idea of what to do with the person whom, for whatever reason, doesn't get that simple “killing is bad” concept after the fact, is difficult and missing the point. Let's use the idea of pit bulls instead of monsters. Some pit bulls have been raised to fight. And when they do sometimes they are put down. Monsters or pit bulls, it really doesn't solve the problem that they were raised to fight, does it?
There is a growing amount of evidence that people like Dahmer were genetically predisposed to their crimes. There are people who just don't feel fear like we do. And the idea is that these folks were born with this deficiency and that really bad, mean parenting creates the killer. Some cops, dare devils, bungee jumping weirdos, racecar drivers, fire fighters, etc etc are also born with this lack of fear thing. But, they were lucky enough to receive good parenting and they use this lack of fear thing to the advantage of society (usually). (Although, the cops as of late are looking mighty scary to me in NY, Philly, and LA).
So, just as I see those poor pit bulls as victims of their circumstances, I see people that way as well. Even the really, really bad monster people. So, I would much rather see a big old argument in the public arena about how to treat children and animals with respect and celebration so that they don't become monsters in the first place. Why don't I ever hear that debate? My suspicion is because for one thing, it sounds very wooey. Even as I typed it I felt weak from the blood hemorrhaging from my heart.
As for eating animals…I gotta tell you, as much as I love my cat and as much as I KNOW he loves me back, I think there are moments when he would eat me if he were just a bit bigger. I eat cows and they don't eat me, but they don't want to. I'm not on their menu, but if I were they would eat me. Tigers would eat me. There are a lot of animals that would eat me. So, I don't feel bad at all eating them right back. Personally I try to stay away from eating plants and such. They don't have feet to run away, so really it's just unfair.
So, that's sort of how I feel on this whole thing, I guess. In sum, rehabilitation, revenge, deterrents, these are all big words for not taking care of business in the first place. And, eat what you want, but please don't eat the daisies.
PS
Abortion and stem cell are red herrings.
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2008 : 19:37:39 [Permalink]
|
Thanks Michelle and Kil.
Dave, Marf, any comments? |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 04:43:54 [Permalink]
|
Seems that every year we read of DNA evidence clearing a death-row inmate, much more often than not a black inmate, of his charges. It makes one wonder how many others got legally, in essence, lynched. And how many are about to be.
"When you've shat the bed, you cannot un-shit it," and there, in brief, is my biggest reason for opposing the death penality. Too often I run into the attitude of: "kill them all, God will know his own." I think it was some Pope or other who put forth that idea and it is as invalid today as it was 'way back then.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 05/12/2008 04:46:18 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 06:14:51 [Permalink]
|
Hey Buck, when you go to move a post and have cut the text, you can delete the massacree by clicking the big, red X at the end of the post's tool bar. This will bring up a box asking for your password. Fill that in and, gnash-grind, the whole thing is deleted as if it never was. Except for your cut text. Which you have saved for elsewhere. Yes.
This also works for when you've really fucked one up and want to get rid of the wretched thing before too many people see it and start making unkind insinuations. 
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 07:06:22 [Permalink]
|
| Hey, Filth, thanks for the info! Fucking Dave just lets a newbie flop around like a floored flounder until they whine for help and then he sometimes steps in and magisterially dispenses a drop of advice. You, on the other hand, are a gentleman, scholar, and a judge of bad whiskey, and you actually volunteer guru secrets to doddering old fools like me that think a space bar is something out of Star Wars! Thank you sir, I think that by the time I'm ninety, I'll have a handle on this Shitz jelloware! |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2008 : 11:05:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
But, hypothetically, Perro, what is your view on the rare situation (there certainly have been some) where the proof of guilt is perfect, there is no way to deny the evidence, the accused has confessed his guilt, in addition to overwhelming, multiple eye-witness evidence, and the perp is a cold-blooded premeditated multiple murderer with full awareness of right and wrong, high intelligence, who has killed repeatedly for money, not sex or passion.
An example would be a financial advisor who repeatedly ingratiates himself with elderly clients until he cleverly manipulates their money into his control using bogus bank accounts and investments, then murders them so that a portion of their estate passes into his hands. He successfully perpetrates this murderous scam on a number of old, lonely people and then is apprehended, he has made serious mistakes in the killings, the evidence (DNA, fingerprints, a witness or two) is completely compelling and he confesses - boasting about his cleverness and states repeatedly that when he gets out he will repeat the crime!
What is the rationale for life imprisonment, other than cost?
|
Thinking about it calmly, I would say life imprisonment or even perhaps letting the prisioner choose between that or death. I guess to some people spending the rest of their lives in jail is worse than death. Also I am guessing it´s not the norm, people tend to choose life at any cost. There are exceptions.
Now, you´ll probably say it does not make sense, however I believe that much of this problem, and many, many others are created by overpopulation of the planet. I am not saying that before we were so many on earth problems like these did not exist. I am saying that right now, with so many people it´s very difficult to find the solutions and apply them.
If you´re interested we can start another thread about that.
Cheers!
Perro de Tokio |
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Cruel, But Not Unusual
