Bush OKs execution of Army death row prisoner

[Traviesa 0]

Please show me statistics where the death penalty actually a) saves taxpayers money or B) deters heinous crimes.

Life is life and while I realize those who commit such atrocities are not respecting life, I also do not see that killing does any good to rectify the horrors committed.

I also am completely flabbergasted that people who oppose abortion can be gung-ho about the death penalty. And yes, I'm talking about Mr. I'm Texan Bush. It's completely hypocritical to say that a woman who chooses abortion is a murderer and a judge (or whomever) who passes the death sentence is merely doing his or her job.

Bull. Life is life. Either protect it and let God be the judge or stfu.

There's a big difference: an unborn child is 100% faultless. On the contrary, in the case of abortion, it is usually the mother or some other person (in the case of rape) who is at fault, but in my mind, neither of which should the unborn child have to pay for with their life.

[Peikko 1,575]

I know. However, you have taken bits of what I am saying and run in the wrong direction.

[NavarreMan 10]

Then am I to understand that you feel that the bible is merely a book written by people, for people and is not the literal "Word of God"?

Sorry, that was directed at PH. I failed to specify that in my reply.

[Peikko 1,575]

Most definitely, although I think merely is rather strong. I actually think that many of the concepts introduced in the bible were rather inspiring and amazing for the time it was written but also many are things in it that illustrate the more brutal ancestory of societal development.

Oops, crappy spelling.

[NavarreMan 10]

Holy #######... we agree on something!

[DeadPoolX 9]

Maybe I'm alone in this, but I don't see the death penalty as a deterrent. Instead, I view it as more of a solution to eliminate threats to society. Yes, I know these criminals are behind bars (some for life), but very often prison sentences are shortened and even when these aren't, criminals can -- and sometimes do -- escape, proving themselves to be a danger once again.

I agree that the death penalty fails as a deterrent and is inefficient and very costly. But if you look at it in terms of "reducing the number of proven criminal threats," then you will see that it does work.

[Peikko 1,575]

As an absolute, that is true, but justice from the human perspective isn't really about absolutes. We know for example that there are too many people on the planet but we aren't going to execute certain groups of people as expendable for the good of those that remain.

[NavarreMan 10]

Maybe I'm alone in this, but I don't see the death penalty as a deterrent. Instead, I view it as more of a solution to eliminate threats to society. Yes, I know these criminals are behind bars (some for life), but very often prison sentences are shortened and even when these aren't, criminals can -- and sometimes do -- escape, proving themselves to be a danger once again.

I agree that the death penalty fails as a deterrent and is inefficient and very costly. But if you look at it in terms of "reducing the number of proven criminal threats," then you will see that it does work.

I also agree that it is a punishment rather than a deterrent. I do not agree that it is inefficient. I think it is very efficient at accomplishing the goal of prevention of a particular murderer from repeating the crime. I think the system is inefficient, and therefore very costly. We have confessed murderers on death row that have confessed and want to die yet we keep them around as long as possible, why?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Maybe I'm alone in this, but I don't see the death penalty as a deterrent. Instead, I view it as more of a solution to eliminate threats to society. Yes, I know these criminals are behind bars (some for life), but very often prison sentences are shortened and even when these aren't, criminals can -- and sometimes do -- escape, proving themselves to be a danger once again.

I agree that the death penalty fails as a deterrent and is inefficient and very costly. But if you look at it in terms of "reducing the number of proven criminal threats," then you will see that it does work.

That isn't really a very satisfactory answer though is it. Sure one guy is killed on the basis of removing him from society for the good of everyone else - but it sounds to me like an easy answer that doesn't want to address underlying problems in specific cases. I mean why was there a big debate (in Florida I think?) about the ethics of executing people who are mentally imcompetant - where paranoid schizophrenics have committed murders because for one reason or another they weren't diagnosed or weren't in a position to acquire the medication needed to control their condition.

There are always nuances - and this meat-cleaver approach to solving problems often seems woefully short-sighted.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

[NavarreMan 10]

But that is part of the problem, we are getting further from the "meat cleaver" approach. We are leaning toward everything is treatable and society pays for it as a whole. I am sure we can find excuses for all behavior if we get the right "experts" to testify. Where do you draw the line? Chikatilo (sp) had a crappy childhood, do you treat him or remove him? What do you do with the Manson's of the world? At some point don't you necessarily have to use the cleaver to draw that line?

[Peikko 1,575]

No, that's a very emotional response to violent crime. The rational response is more complex as has been discussed. It is not a question of justification either. No one wants to excuse a criminal after the fact but to move forward it is necessary to understand how these things occurr to try to prevent other people from ending up in the same predicament. That is the direction to go in.

[Peikko 1,575]

We can't treat what we don't understand all we can do is remove them from normal society. There is nothing else to do in these instances of terrible violent crime, which of course are the most rare forms of criminal behaviour as well. That removal can successfully be accomplished by sending them to jail permanantly. Whether you give them any form of treament while there, well, tha'ts a completely different question really.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

But that is part of the problem, we are getting further from the "meat cleaver" approach. We are leaning toward everything is treatable and society pays for it as a whole. I am sure we can find excuses for all behavior if we get the right "experts" to testify. Where do you draw the line? Chikatilo (sp) had a crappy childhood, do you treat him or remove him? What do you do with the Manson's of the world? At some point don't you necessarily have to use the cleaver to draw that line?

Are we really moving away from that approach though? There are still cases where courts refuse to separate the mad from the bad (the big furore over pedophiles being one such example). Clearly you can't excuse the crime, or refuse to acknowledge that such people are dangerous, but you do have cases where clear warning signs were in evidence for months or years before but nothing was done - then it would seem that executing the person is only addressing the least useful aspect of the case and doing little or nothing to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Just one example - Child Services in NY has taken a beating for the murders of several children that were on its at-risk register, because their staff either didn't take the time to investigate or follow up on specific complaints in a timely manner. Were they directly responsible for the child's deaths? Of course not... But clearly the institution failed in such a way that made those crimes possible. Is recognising this less, the same or more important than ensuring that those who actually did the killing are themselves killed...

Clearly its a complex question...

As to "who pays" - well society as a whole always pays. It doesn't recoup the damage by executing its diseased elements.

[NavarreMan 10]

So now that we know that that a majority of violent criminals have crappy childhoods what do we do? Now that we know that sexual preditors have been molested themselves, what do we do? Now that we have children committing violent crimes what do we do? Analizing the problem, while interesting, is not finding an immediate solution. When Joe Criminal breaks into my house, justice will be dealt quickly and without regard for the bad childhood he/she may have had. And, thanks to Florida law, it will be lasting justice with no worries about repeat offenses.