"If this does not qualify for the death sentence, then there is no case that would''

[Lawrence of Arabia]

if you can answer this question, then i will become pro death penalty

why is it that it is wrong for an individual to kill another individual, but right for the state to kill that individual, for the murder of another individual?

[Velociryx]

can't GET much more isolated than being on Death Row, Ramo....but he still managed to squeeze out one more murder FROM DEATH ROW before they fried him.

Another sugesstion, mayhaps?

-=Vel=-

[Kuciwalker]

Do you mean the one being killed is a murderer?

The reason is because a private individual is not competent (i.e. doesn't have jurisdiction) to determine the guilt of the person, but the State does. It's exactly the same for ALL crimes.

EDIT: re LoA

[Velociryx]

Lawrence: For the same reason we amputate limbs of some hospital patients to spare the whole.

-=Vel=-

[Lawrence of Arabia]

yea, its called solitary confinement - they never had a problem in alcatraz.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

The reason is because a private individual is not competent (i.e. doesn't have jurisdiction) to determine the guilt of the person, but the State does. It's exactly the same for ALL crimes.

and what gives the right to the state to kill?

Lawrence: For the same reason we amputate limbs of some hospital patients to spare the whole.

crappy analogy. the individual can exist without society, but soceity cannot exist without the individual

[Velociryx]

Alcatraz had more than it's share of prison killings (including a number of its guards). Even those in solitary confinement have contact (however limited) with others. This is by no means a bullet proof methodology of seeing that the killers will not kill again.

-=Vel=-

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Alcatraz had more than it's share of prison killings (including a number of its guards). Even those in solitary confinement have contact (however limited) with others. This is by no means a bullet proof methodology of seeing that the killers will not kill again.

those who were in solitary confinement never killed a single person during their stay in the hole (usually 2 weeks or so)

[Velociryx]

Lawrence, while what you say is no doubt true, the fact is, these murders are IN our society. Had they been outside of our society, we'd not have even known of their crimes. It is that they are members OF our society that we come to know them and what they do, and AS members of the society (the whole), they are subject to punishment (including death) FROM the whole.

-=Vel=-

[Ramo]

More acceptable than dying, though.

Irrelevent. No one's going to committ a murder if he really thinks that he might go to prison for life.

can't GET much more isolated than being on Death Row, Ramo....but he still managed to squeeze out one more murder FROM DEATH ROW before they fried him.

Another sugesstion, mayhaps?

As Lawrence pointed out, there's solitary confinement. I've never heard of murders from solitary.

[Velociryx]

those who were in solitary confinement never killed a single person during their stay in the hole (usually 2 weeks or so)

Irrelevant, I would say.

The ONLY viable measure is "do they kill again?"

Not, do they kill again when by themselves.

That part doesn't matter, because the answer is obviously no (or if yes, then it's a suicide, and problem solved!)

-=Vel=-

[Ramo]

Lawrence, while what you say is no doubt true, the fact is, these murders are IN our society. Had they been outside of our society, we'd not have even known of their crimes. It is that they are members OF our society that we come to know them and what they do, and AS members of the society (the whole), they are subject to punishment (including death) FROM the whole.

But why? If it's wrong for a person to kill out of revenge, why is it moral for a state to do so?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Lawrence, while what you say is no doubt true, the fact is, these murders are IN our society.
Had they been outside of our society, we'd not have even known of their crimes. It is that they are members OF our society that we come to know them and what they do, and AS members of the society (the whole), they are subject to punishment (including death) FROM the whole.

-=Vel=-

but that still doesnt answer the question. what gives us the right (as a soceity) to kill someone for killing someone. wouldnt you call that hypocritical.

[Velociryx]

Because society has a right to protect itself from those who would threaten it.

If society is threatened by a murderous individual, he is (or certainly can be) put to death.

If society is threatened by another society, war results, and LOTS of people are put to death.

It's the way the world works guys.

-=Vel=-

[Ramo]

It's not the way it works in other countries.

I'd add that incarcerating everyone isn't practical in war. Killing isn't necessarily revenge.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
and what gives the right to the state to kill?

What gives it the right to imprison people? What gives it the right to pass laws? What gives it the right to impose taxes?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Because society has a right to protect itself from those who would threaten it.

i agree, so put them in jail for life.

If society is threatened by a murderous individual, he is (or certainly can be) put to death.

and why is that? how can two wrongs be right. why not put hiim in jail for life

If society is threatened by another society, war results, and LOTS of people are put to death.

well, a society doesnt even need to be threatened by another to result in war. but these people are not put to death by a legal system. they are put to death by chance.

you still havnt answered why two wrongs make a right.

[Aeson]

It's your terminology Vel. "Creatures." A detachment from the brutal truth that this is a human being who either by birth or environment was twisted to be capable of something horrific. In the right (or wrong rather) circumstance we all become these "creatures". Wouldn't you like to know why?

That aside, it was a generalization prompted by your terminology. I've discussed this with people who while kind hearted and generous to a fault with law abiding citizens, can't summon enough compassion to even give the benefit of the doubt to someone charged with a crime. There are all gradiants inbetween, but the common thread is an incapacity to admit that but for a gene here or there, an inappropriate level of a chemical in the brain, or a circumstance intolerable, there go we.

Do you accept that?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

What gives it the right to imprison people? What gives it the right to pass laws? What gives it the right to impose taxes?

when someone violates someone else's rights, the violator loses some of their rights. 2. there is no right to pass laws, and 3, there is no right to impose taxes.

[Kuciwalker]

It's your terminology Vel. "Creatures." A detachment from the brutal truth that this is a human being who either by birth or environment was twisted to be capable of something horrific. In the right (or wrong rather) circumstance we all become these "creatures". Wouldn't you like to know why?

In different circumstances, I could be Hitler - I mean hey, if I had his genes, and his upbringing, I would be just like him!

I feel so much sympathy now.

The "could be" argument is pointless, because it's fundamentally the same as "if I were a moose, I would be a moose - therefore I could be a moose!" It's absurd

[Velociryx]

You're right...it's not the way it works in other countries, and they've got problems of their own, not the least of which are burgeoning welfare states (which is only added to by keeping increasing numbers of murderers under close guard...and you wanna talk expensive....if you're advocating lifetime solitary confinement for these guys, then get ready to pull your wallet out, cos that's gonna get EXPENSIVE!).

As for me, I just don't care enough about 'em to spend that kind of money on 'em. Further, I've given you a real life example of the dangers inherent in keeping these guys under your kinder, gentler lock and key. Mr. Gaskins' killing spree barely took a breath of a pause, even AFTER he was incarcerated, but you know what? He hasn't killed anybody else since he went rounds with the electric chair. That's....pretty effective, I'd say!

-=Vel=-

[Lawrence of Arabia]

You're right...it's not the way it works in other countries, and they've got problems of their own, not the least of which are burgeoning welfare states (which is only added to by keeping increasing numbers of murderers under close guard...and you wanna talk expensive....if you're advocating lifetime solitary confinement for these guys, then get ready to pull your wallet out, cos that's gonna get EXPENSIVE!).

actually, if you let out all the drug dealers, drug users, and other drug related 'criminals', along with prostitues, you would see prison population decrease by 45%. looks like cash is no longer a problem, since for the same price, you can lock up those who really harm others.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

and you know what else is effective? all those people who were innocent that got killed. how do you feel about that? i bet it makes you all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that dozens of innocents have been fried. mmmm. krispy kritters.

[Velociryx]

Aeson, yes, I'm curious to know why.

Am I so curious as to risk that person killing again? No way. They've already proved that they're menaces to society by way of their actions. Wanna keep a couple around to 'speriment on? Be my guest! We'll make special arrangements for those, and study them under the closest possibly scrutiny, and who knows, in a few decades, maybe we'll learn a thing or three from them that'll stave off the next crop.

But until we do, let's not have a serial killer daycare system....let's not let them write books and do movie of the week deals, or continue their killing sprees from "inside the big house." Let's just acknowledge that they're dangerous and deal with them accordingly and permanantly.

-=Vel=-

[Aeson]

Hypothetical:

If the means to identify a killer were to become available, before they kill, would you advocate killing them Vel?

[Velociryx]

Lawrence: Believe it or not, while your "casual" smoker is pretty harmless, Drug Dealers tend to be extremely territorial in their natures and enjoy the occassional shooting spree or gang war to keep their turf clear and send messages to their rivals.

If you'd like to set these people free, sure....we can do that, but I'd make sure you were living in a pretty exclusive neighborhood, far from the shootouts beforehand.

As to the innocents who were put to death....yes, that is unfortunate, and a part of our fallability as human beings. Equally unfortunate are those who die in hospitals or in car accidents each year. Does this mean, however, that we should ban medicine and automobiles? After all, think of all the innocents who have died, simply from those two alone!

We make mistakes.

We'll continue to make mistakes.

It's not a perfect world.

I wish it was.

-=Vel=-

[Ramo]

You're right...it's not the way it works in other countries, and they've got problems of their own, not the least of which are burgeoning welfare states (which is only added to by keeping increasing numbers of murderers under close guard...and you wanna talk expensive....if you're advocating lifetime solitary confinement for these guys, then get ready to pull your wallet out, cos that's gonna get EXPENSIVE!).

Far, far, far less expensive than holding half a million non-violent drug offenders.

As for me, I just don't care enough about 'em to spend that kind of money on 'em. Further, I've given you a real life example of the dangers inherent in keeping these guys under your kinder, gentler lock and key. Mr. Gaskins' killing spree barely took a breath of a pause, even AFTER he was incarcerated, but you know what? He hasn't killed anybody else since he went rounds with the electric chair. That's....pretty effective, I'd say!

He's also been dead, Vel. Do you believe that life loses its value when one does something bad? What if the state executes innocent people, does that make it ok to execute the DA and judge in return? Broadly speeking, not every murderer is like your Mr. Gaskin. How likely do you think is it that a murderer will kill again?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

vel has no logic behind his arguements. im quite surprised actually. i used to think he was rational.

[Velociryx]

Hypothetical Answer to Aeson:

Assuming we had the means to delve so deeply into the psyche of these disturbed individuals as to be able to accurately predict their behavior, then it would be a reasonalbe expectation that a "cure" for their behavior would be relatively close at hand, and in that case, I'd be in favor of something far harsher than permanant solitary confinement (which has been the harshest thing posted by the anti-DP'ers so far)....something more akin to an induced coma, until such time as that cure was realized.

-=Vel=-

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Lawrence: Believe it or not, while your "casual" smoker is pretty harmless, Drug Dealers tend to be extremely territorial in their natures and enjoy the occassional shooting spree or gang war to keep their turf clear and send messages to their rivals.

yeah, and you know why? cuz its not legalized, so they use drugs as a way to finanace themselves. why do you think prohibition brought about the greatest criminals of the century? because they used booze sales to make money.

As to the innocents who were put to death....yes, that is unfortunate, and a part of our fallability as human beings. Equally unfortunate are those who die in hospitals or in car accidents each year. Does this mean, however, that we should ban medicine and automobiles? After all, think of all the innocents who have died, simply from those two alone!

except those who died in automobile accidents were not put to death by society, but by either carelessness, or unluckiness. they were not condemned as killers, or rapists

and im sure its easy for you to say its a mistake. what happens if one day you get put to death for a murder you didnt commit. Xin Loi. a mistake. thatll make you feel so much better, right before the toxins flow into your body and stop your heart from beating.