Triumphrat

LEE · 11-11-2012, 06:52 PM

Sorry the only punishment that is a cures is the death penalty...not to be a wise arse but repeat offenses are very common. How do you deter or stop it?

Boldor · 11-11-2012, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IBALEE

How do you deter or stop it?

Firstly you have to understand what drives the offender to offend to answer that question; we are not going to find that out by cooking him. Obviously incarceration and/or the death penalty is not a deterrent unless you have a healthy(ish) psyche - I doubt this Bloke has much healthy going on in his psyche.

Secondly, I have not suggested we give this Bloke a Hawaiian lea, a slap on the back and we say "Seeya later Matey". Repeat offense is not an option while he's locked up.

Just for the record, I wouldn't get too upset if the colour flatscreen tele in his cell went on the blink, or his pillow wasn't puffy enough either.

spank86 · 11-11-2012, 07:37 PM

IMHO the death penalty is more like bleach than antibiotics, or if it is like antibiotics then we are all bacteria not just the killers.

Using that as an analogy it does exactly the same as antibiotics, removes those that are susceptible to it leaving you with a pool of individuals without the traits that caused death.

lam@ratf · 11-11-2012, 08:38 PM

When someone makes the decision to do something that would earn them the death penalty they have forfeited any right to my consideration in the same way that someone breaking into my home in the middle of the night forfeits the right to keep breathing.

Unless you're rescuing my unconscious body from a burning building kind of thing you have no business being there and deserve whatever damage I can do to you.

Taking a life, any life is (or should be) a very serious matter. My concern is for the rest of society. What does it do to us to sanction murder? Especially when we acknowledge it can be done in error? It can prevent a recurrence but does it accomplish anything positive for anyone in the society? Sometimes at the time of the execution members of victims families have said it brought them closure but has anyone asked them if they still think or feel that years later?

I am disturbed that we know some executions are done to the innocent but we continue our day to day lives without much comment. We say that a human life is beyond price but we are willing to throw a percentage of these lives away.

We've had more than enough "practice" and we still can't always get it right. Maybe we should stop until we can.

roxynoodle · 11-11-2012, 08:56 PM

I am in favor of the death penalty because if your crime is so heinous that you could never be trusted in society again, I don't want to help pay to keep you alive at a cost of possibly millions per prisoner.

And why do they deserve better treatment than their victims?

If it is known without a doubt the person committed said heinous acts, I don't have a problem with it at all.

I'm not necessarily talking about all murderers. The woman who shot her two sons who were dying of Huntington's and suffering horribly is not the same as a serial killer or mass murderer IMO. It is very unlikely she will ever do it again, and did it out of mercy. A psychopath is always going to do it again (and enjoy it).

dogtired · 11-11-2012, 09:08 PM

I read somewhere once that it was the development of language that allowed us to collectively bring about the first death sentence.

If I remember right it went something along the lines of we were a violent tribal group of humanoids ruled by a few select vicious individuals, who were absolutely brutal to the lesser members of the tribe. The development of language allowed the smaller weaker members to organise themselves to such an extent that they were able to, as a group, dispose of the more brutal members.

Over time, the elimination of this violent genetic trait provided a shift in tribal dynamics from a more brutal aspect to one of cooperation.

...it is just a theory, but one I like.

Thank you for indulging me.
You may all now pick up your pitchforks and torches and return to storming the castle and baying for blood.

lam@ratf · 11-11-2012, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roxynoodle

And why do they deserve better treatment than their victims?

Because we aren't them. It's not about how bad they are, it's about how good we're trying to be.

roxynoodle · 11-11-2012, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lam@ratf

Because we aren't them. It's not about how bad they are, it's about how good we're trying to be.

Trust me, they don't care.

LEE · 11-11-2012, 09:28 PM

The only caveat I have is that if a murderer is paroled then that board and that state should be held liable and cupable for any crimes ...damage or murders they commit on release. That is criminal and civil accountability.

Then maybe if someone on a parole board feels they deserve release maybe think twice before letting out the door to continue on a crime spree.

roxynoodle · 11-11-2012, 09:32 PM

Well, that's part of the problem: they have to let them out because it costs too much to keep them all in

Instead of keeping some of these "humans" on death row for 40 years, that money could probably be better put to use on programs and education for at risk youth or something. Nothing can fix certain murderers, but maybe some of the gang violence murders and assaults would be reduced.