Your logic would make eugenics sound like a great idea too you realise.
The Death Penalty
- 主题发起人 Gculk
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Again this money argument. Let me quote from 'California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice':BocajacoB 说:
"The commission did not advocate abolishing the death penalty but did note that California could save $100 million a year
if the state replaced the punishment with sentences of life in prison without possibility of parole.
Death row prisoners cost more to confine, are granted more resources for appeals,
have more expensive trials and usually die in prison anyway, the commission said in its 117-page report"
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/01/local/me-death1
[note however that in California: "The time from sentencing to execution is twice the national average".
But it doesn't change the fact that death row is very expensive]
And I know some bozo will say "kill them immediately with no appeals or anything. That will save money". I will ignore that.
And ask yourself: is saving money a legal argument for the judicial principle of death penalty?
Mage246
The argument that the death penalty costs more money is based upon a system that places (in my opinion) too high a priority on being absolutely sure that the party is guilty. If death row inmates were given the same level of resources as normal inmates when it comes to their ability to appeal, their living conditions, their trials, etc., then the price advantage of executions would be readily apparent. It is only because we treat these inmates differently than other inmates that they cost more to incarcerate. A handful of wrongful deaths of innocent men should not be allowed to pervert the entire process and allow the guilty to place an undue burden on society.
Folthrik 说:How to solve the money problem:
1. No appeals if there is no doubt they are guilty.
2. Throw em' in concrete cells with nothing but bread and water.
There goes the money problem
1 is stupid. There can never, ever be absolute certainty. Even with sixteen witnesses and CCTV footage, you can't be 100% certain it wasn't a mafia setup/fluctuations in the space time continuum.
That said, in the context of a country with the death sentence, a reasonable certainty is probably going to entail a number of unbiased witnesses. But then think about it, there's always a context to a murder. For the clinically insane the appeal is madness, is it fair to end someone's life if they have no control over their actions?
2 is probably fairer, and I'd say it's the better alternative to a death pentalty. For crimes as serious as murder or rape, life spent in the most boring and uncomfortable of surroundings, without any reasonable hope of escape, is probably a far worse punishment than a painless death.
Gculk 说:
As far as I remember, you swore like an 8 year old who'd been refused an ice cream and got banned for stalking me around the forum and insulting me mindlessly, but hey. If I cared enough I'd dig up the old thread and show you the fault in your argument again, but to be frank I've got other things to do. If you can be bothered, link me the thread and I'll see what I can do.
I'd say this though: Chill out, seriously, if you got banned it was your fault. Just get on with your life and forget something as trivial as losing a debate and getting banned.
EDIT: Wait I rememer. Here, read this carefully.
Cleaning Agent 说:I think you've twisted things a little my friend. Allow me to put it very, very simply for you.
You claimed that murderers should be killed.
I said that by that logic you would kill judges for murder as well, and that it would be better to simply jail criminals.
You twisted my ideas to state that I thought judges should be killed for ordering someone to be murdered.
So in fact, your tirade of righteous anger at flawed logic was entirely directed at yourself
And here's the link to the thread.
http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,24807.15.html
MountainBlade
Sergeant Knight at Arms
What a sad thread.
Mage246
Actually, CA, I just reread that thread and your post made absolutely no sense. You see, the definition of murder is not killing, but wrongful (ie illegal) killing. Sentencing someone to death and/or executing them is not murder, because it is done according to the rules of law. Your first objection to Gculk's statements made no sense, which is no doubt why his reply made little sense to you.
Folthrik 说:How to solve the money problem:
1. No appeals if there is no doubt they are guilty.
2. Throw em' in concrete cells with nothing but bread and water.
There goes the money problem
This ignores 2 facts.
People aren't convicted in criminal law if there not absolutely sure they did it, as the proof has to be "beyond all reasonable doubt". So everyone in prison is assumed absolutely guilty.
Then, rehabilitation rates are a lot higher if they are treated better in prison, which makes sense. Which society would you want to rejoin, one that treated you with humanity or one that humiliates you.
Mage246 说:
And by your logic Gculk's posts also make no sense, because kidnapping is unlawful imprisonment, extortion is unlawfully fining someone etc. Thing is, he took a counter to his argument and twisted it to make it my own logic. I never actually advocated killing judges for sentencing people to death, I simply pointed out that it was hypocritical to kill killers.
While you may say that murder is not the same as execution, from the point of view of someone who would abolish the death penalty, all death is to be avoided, and thus all deaths caused intentionally would equate to murder.
From the other perspective of course there is lawful and unlawful death, which is why Gculk didn't understand my argument, because he refused to apply my viewpoints to my argument.
Mage246
I'm not making any argument about what I "believe" murder means, I'm simply stating a fact. Executions are not murder, by definition. The only possible way that they could be is if the executioners/justice system knew that the person was innocent of the crime of which they were accused, but chose to execute anyway. People who are opposed to the death penalty might consider executions to be "murder", but only in the way that any loony person can try to redefine words to mean what they *want* them to mean. To put it simply, those who call executions "murder" are wrong, and not just wrong but objectively wrong. They could legitimately call them "unjust", "arbitrary", or "cruel", but "murder" is not applicable.
Yeah, you're right.
Ah well.
Ah well.
Gculk 说:
No silly, not you, Mage. Victory by association is a cheap and low form of gratification!
Don't you see, you could probably have beaten me yourself, but by allowing someone else to beat me, I deprived you of the satisfaction of winning. And now, the masterful plan unfolds, and you see that in fact it is I who have acheived victory through defeat, by depriving you of a well earned reward!
(Just kidding, you owned me, but hey, life would be boring if I won all the time
)
Dreen
Banned
Im waiting for mind control devices that will allow prisoners to serve as free forced labor.
As to death penalty, I support it, but I am a bit afraid of it. I dont think judges these days are as objective as they are supposed to be. Death penalty can be used wisely to eliminate people who would otherwise bring only great harm to other people. If misused however... it becomes a way to dispose of unwanted, unproductive... and disagreeing.
If there was a death penalty referendum in my country, Id oppose it. Our justice system is flawed on basic levels and needs a lot work before we think of introducing this tool.
As to death penalty, I support it, but I am a bit afraid of it. I dont think judges these days are as objective as they are supposed to be. Death penalty can be used wisely to eliminate people who would otherwise bring only great harm to other people. If misused however... it becomes a way to dispose of unwanted, unproductive... and disagreeing.
If there was a death penalty referendum in my country, Id oppose it. Our justice system is flawed on basic levels and needs a lot work before we think of introducing this tool.
silverkatana
Sergeant at Arms
Archonsod 说:
Archonsod 说:
Archonsod 说:
Archonsod 说:
Archonsod 说:
Quite the interesting society we’d have if you were King of the World. From your posts, I’ve deduced some of the guiding legal principles of Archieland:
I.
Rights and privileges extended to members of society shall be null and void if a member fails, in any fashion whatsoever, to follow the established rules and principles of the society.
II.
Anyone who fails to achieve complete adherence to society’s principles shall be given a die to roll. If the accused rolls an odd number, they shall be executed. If they roll a two, they shall be set free. If they roll a four or a six, they shall be beaten severely and released.
III.
All failures to follow society's rules are equally severe, and shall result in punishment by the aforementioned die of doom.
IV.
Every member of society is guilty, if not of breaking the law, than of being an inferior genetic specimen. Therefore every citizen shall pass before the die of doom on the second Tuesday following every fifth yearly anniversary of their birth.
V.
As complete compliance with society’s principles is detrimental to the economy, failure to break at least one rule (and so fall into compliance with section IV) shall be illegal, so as to ensure the complete validity of section IV.
VI.
By combination of sections I, IV, and V, no member of society shall have any rights or privileges whatsoever, save to exist upon the Crown’s sufferance until such time as the Crown ceases to be amused by them.
VII.
All hail King Archie!
13 Spider Bloody Chain
Grandmaster Knight
What amuses me the most is that he probably could hold such a state together, too, without getting assassinated or somesuch. Maybe even beyond his death if he leaves a suitable heir.
My own views are this, hang the the following:
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced Law (as in soliciting)
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced politics.
Proven murders.
Pedophiles with harmful intent.
Proven Rapists.
Abusive parents.
The Methodists
Salesmen
Chavs
Overpaid football players.
Corrupt officials
People who don't like Top Gear or Jeremy Clarkson
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced Law (as in soliciting)
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced politics.
Proven murders.
Pedophiles with harmful intent.
Proven Rapists.
Abusive parents.
The Methodists
Salesmen
Chavs
Overpaid football players.
Corrupt officials
People who don't like Top Gear or Jeremy Clarkson
You disgust me mister pig, even if they roasted your sweet juicy body, I would still chuck it into my compost bin.
My own views are this, hang the the following:
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced Law (as in soliciting)
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced politics.
Proven murders.
Pedophiles with harmful intent.
Proven Rapists.
Abusive parents.
The Methodists
Salesmen
Chavs
Overpaid football players.
Corrupt officials
People who don't like Top Gear or Jeremy Clarkson
Greedy online leeches
My own views are this, hang the the following:
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced Law (as in soliciting)
Those that are studying, practicing or have practiced politics.
Proven murders.
Pedophiles with harmful intent.
Proven Rapists.
Abusive parents.
The Methodists
Salesmen
Chavs
Overpaid football players.
Corrupt officials
People who don't like Top Gear or Jeremy Clarkson
Greedy online leeches
