Support NeoGAF

[ReBurn]

I'm against the death penalty but I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

Your analogy doesn't work, imo. The justice system isn't a "cure" for crime, it is an attempt to regulate it. The justice system doesn't "spread crime" in the way your suggesting this cure spreads cancer. It is a deterrent not a cure. I don't think most people would argue that the death penalty causes criminals to commit crime.

That's true. I like this post.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I don't think many are arguing that literally every person on death row is innocent.

Similarly, I hope you can agree that some are, indeed, not guilty. If so, what percentage of innocent people being killed represents a tolerable threshold for you? That's an honest question.

Would you consider it acceptable if 1/10th of those executed were actually innocent? 1/20th? 1/50th?

Personally out of that 230 I wouldn't want it than 5, though I'd be willing to accept 10. The problem is you really can't tell, unless someone just out and out confesses to the crime and provides evidence showing they did it. I mean a lot of people will say oh this person is innocent, this evidence shows their innocent (even if it's not), etc and the truth is their guilty.

Personally I'd like to see a death sentence require a jury finding beyond a shadow of a doubt that they committed a crime deserving to be sentenced to death during the penalty phase. Look I am all for procedural safeguards, at the same time I'd want the ability to ensure people like the two above could be executed.

 

[tanod]

I'm against the death penalty but I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

Your analogy doesn't work, imo. The justice system isn't a "cure" for crime, it is an attempt to regulate it. The justice system doesn't "spread crime" in the way your suggesting this cure spreads cancer. It is a deterrent not a cure. I don't think most people would argue that the death penalty causes criminals to commit crime.

If you looked at the death penalty specifically through the lens of death penalty for only murder cases, then the analogy works in that the system "spreads murder" by performing the execution while it cures it by stopping a convicted murderer of doing so again.

 

[ReBurn]

Is it true that it's less expensive to put someone in prison for life than it is to execute them? What with the cost of appeal after appeal fighting it? I'd think that if we didn't stop execution as a matter of principle we'd do it to save money. Times are tough for state governments and all.

 

[empty vessel]

I'm against the death penalty but I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

It is a deterrent not a cure. I don't think most people would argue that the death penalty causes criminals to commit crime.

Setting aside the question whether the death penalty causes individuals to commit crime (I would actually have to be persuaded that it doesn't, since I think it has social conditioning effects that are severely underestimated or ignored), that is not the point I am making. Use of the death penalty caused us to collectively perpetrate a crime when we, through the State, murdered one Cameron Willingham after his children burned to death in a house fire. Use of the death penalty inflicted the very thing it is intended to deter. By the death penalty's logic, we should all be executed.

 

[tanod]

Is it true that it's less expensive to put someone in prison for life than it is to execute them? What with the cost of appeal after appeal fighting it? I'd think that if we didn't stop execution as a matter of principle we'd do it to save money. Times are tough for state governments and all.

It is true or it was true. Don't have the data to back it up now but I did an assignment in Public Speaking 101 in college about 10 years ago and that was one of the points I found in my research.

 

[Byakuya769]

I'm against the death penalty but I'm going to play devil's advocate here.

It is a deterrent not a cure. I don't think most people would argue that the death penalty causes criminals to commit crime.

Acknowledging that you're simply playing devil's advocate, I'd like to point out something.

The chorus of "good, they deserved to die!" that is sang about the death penalty makes it pretty hard to ignore its retributive nature.

It's not simply a deterrent.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Is it true that it's less expensive to put someone in prison for life than it is to execute them? What with the cost of appeal after appeal fighting it? I'd think that if we didn't stop execution as a matter of principle we'd do it to save money. Times are tough for state governments and all.

I've heard that too. I've always wondered what the cost is in different states. I would think that a state where the process is a long time and few are executed that would be true. I wonder about Texas though.

That said one could argue that life could be cheaper because prisoners are treated like shit with horrible conditions.

 

[RustyNails]

Personally out of that 230 I wouldn't want it than 5, though I'd be willing to accept 10. The problem is you really can't tell, unless someone just out and out confesses to the crime and provides evidence showing they did it. I mean a lot of people will say oh this person is innocent, this evidence shows their innocent (even if it's not), etc and the truth is their guilty.

Personally I'd like to see a death sentence require a jury finding beyond a shadow of a doubt that they committed a crime deserving to be sentenced to death during the penalty phase. Look I am all for procedural safeguards, at the same time I'd want the ability to ensure people like the two above could be executed.

I don't understand. You'd rather execute 10 innocent people for a crime they did not commit just to carry on the tradition of executing people for crimes they commit? Sounds ghastly to me. Why not just give everyone the benefit of the doubt? No one is against executing child murderers or serial killers. The problem stems from the fact that justice is blind. For this reason, many in here (including I), believe that we should rather avoid executing those 230 individuals in order to protect those 10 innocent individuals from execution.

 

[Margalis]

Seriously. It's disgusting. These people are supposedly Christian I'd venture to guess. CLAPPING AT KILLING A PERSON!!!

Christians support execution, war and torture at a rate higher than the general populace.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I don't understand. You'd rather execute 10 innocent people for a crime they did not commit just to carry on the tradition of executing people for crimes they commit? Sounds ghastly to me. Why not just give everyone the benefit of the doubt? No one is against executing child murderers or serial killers. The problem stems from the fact that justice is blind. For this reason, many in here (including I), believe that we should rather avoid executing those 230 individuals in order to protect those 10 innocent individuals from execution.

No, I'm saying I would be willing to tolerate that as a failure rate, I wouldn't rather execute them and there is no guaranteeing that it is that high.

As I said I think the death penalty should be reserved for crimes deserving of it and when it can be demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person committed the crime. If that means less death sentences, I'm fine with it. I think a balance can be struck that balances risks of potential innocents and still punish the guilty.

Christians support execution, war and torture at a rate higher than the general populace.

It's funny how everyone assumes everyone there is a Christian and/or must be tied to Christian dogma.

 

[ToxicAdam]

It's not really a christian thing, it's an authoritarian thing. People like that want laws and they want the laws to be enforced.

 

[RustyNails]

Christians support execution, war and torture at a rate higher than the general populace.

Pretty grand, coming from adherants who believe their deity was tortured and executed. Christians should be vehemently anti-torture and anti-execution just based on those articles of belief alone.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Pretty grand, coming from adherants who believe their deity was tortured and executed. Christians should be vehemently anti-torture and anti-execution just based on those articles of belief alone.

Most Christians don't even read the Bible. That alone should tell you something.

 

[ReBurn]

Most Christians don't even read the Bible. That alone should tell you something.

Well, now that movie is out. Who reads any more?

 

[RustyNails]

Most Christians don't even read the Bible. That alone should tell you something.

I don't dispute that, but I'm sure all of them watched Passion of the Christ or at least know the basics of why that figure on the cross is so messed up.

 

[Vanillalite]

Okay a MoveOn.Org Flow Chart....

 

[SD-Ness]

Why I'm against the death penalty:

1) The justice system is imperfect and not empirical. For all the meticulousness and rigor involved, this is still not enough to merit such a drastic course of action. I'd hate to think about the wrong person being charged with a crime, and then executed.

2) It's outdated. I don't think a 21st democracy needs it. Historically speaking, I can see how it evolved and why it was useful. But not anymore.

3) Rehab > retribution

4) Fiscally speaking, life in prison is less expensive.

But more devil's advocate because it's fun...

If you looked at the death penalty specifically through the lens of death penalty for only murder cases, then the analogy works in that the system "spreads murder" by performing the execution while it cures it by stopping a convicted murderer of doing so again.

1) Regarding the system "spreading murder by performing execution," I think a distinction can be made between the government/justice system executing a criminal and citizen murdering another citizen. The justice system was established to regulate crime. I don't think it's necessarily a contradictory situation if the government executes criminals. By which I mean: the government is not committing a crime by executing a criminal.

2) Yes, it is "curing" something by preventing the criminal from committing the crime again. But my criticism of the cure analogy was more general: I don't think this happens on society-as-a-whole level.

Is it true that it's less expensive to put someone in prison for life than it is to execute them? What with the cost of appeal after appeal fighting it? I'd think that if we didn't stop execution as a matter of principle we'd do it to save money. Times are tough for state governments and all.

I used to have a really good website/infographic that showed how the death penalty is more expensive than life in prison. I have to find it.

Setting aside the question whether the death penalty causes individuals to commit crime (I would actually have to be persuaded that it doesn't, since I think it has social conditioning effects that are severely underestimated or ignored), that is not the point I am making. Use of the death penalty caused us to collectively perpetrate a crime when we, through the State, murdered one Cameron Willingham after his children burned to death in a house fire. Use of the death penalty inflicted the very thing it is intended to deter. By the death penalty's logic, we should all be executed.

1) Elaborate on those social conditioning effects. I'm intrigued.

2) I disagree with what you're saying about Willingham. The government is not committing a murder or committing the thing it intends to deter. It is a legal course of action. It is not a crime for the government to execute someone; it is a crime for a citizen to murder another citizen.

Acknowledging that you're simply playing devil's advocate, I'd like to point out something.

The chorus of "good, they deserved to die!" that is sang about the death penalty makes it pretty hard to ignore its retributive nature.

It's not simply a deterrent.

There are many ignorant people who think like this. So, yes, I agree. That is an abhorrent way to think. But I don't think everyone approaches it this way.

This retribution is not some random phenomenon. These criminals are breaking the law -- knowingly -- and the punishment for that is X Y or Z depending on the crime. It is not a procedure being carried out in secret.

 

[Averon]

I always found conservatives general support for state and government execution perplexing. Government isn't trust-worthy enough for taxes, healthcare, etc.. but they are a-ok with the government doling out death sentences?

 

[SD-Ness]

I always found conservatives general support for state and government execution perplexing. Government isn't trust-worthy enough for taxes, healthcare, etc.. but they are a-ok with the government doling out death sentences?

Their thought process...

When it comes to economics: Government should GTFO.

When it comes to society: Don't GTFO.

 

[Puddles]

If I wrote for the Onion, I bet I could come up with something about how 2000+ pages of regulation in the Bible is shackling our economy and undermining our liberty.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I always found conservatives general support for state and government execution perplexing. Government isn't trust-worthy enough for taxes, healthcare, etc.. but they are a-ok with the government doling out death sentences?

Neocons and tea party people heavily support police/military. The death penalty is just an offshoot of their admiration of that law and authority.

It has nothing to do with the government providing handouts to the poor, universal health care or taxes.

 

[cooljeanius]

Hi PoliGAF, just posting another link to another political thread I made that I'd like some feedback on:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=444005

 

[speculawyer]

David Frum is tearing into Perry on twitter. Damn, the Bush folks are focused

Frum hates the anti-science anti-intellectual right. And Perry plays into that base big time with climate change denialism, evolution bashing, etc.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Frum hates the anti-science anti-intellectual right. And Perry plays into that base big time with climate change denialism, evolution bashing, etc.

He fit's more in with the Jewish Neocon end of the Republican party.

 

[Snaku]

Pretty grand, coming from adherants who believe their deity was tortured and executed. Christians should be vehemently anti-torture and anti-execution just based on those articles of belief alone.

But if he weren't tortured and executed, they wouldn't have a free pass to Heaven. So...it's actually a good thing.

 

[ReBurn]

Neocons and tea party people heavily support police/military. The death penalty is just an offshoot of their admiration of that law and authority.

It has nothing to do with the government providing handouts to the poor, universal health care or taxes.

Wow, I haven't seen the word neocon used as a pejorative term since like when Al Gore didn't get to be president because Florida didn't know how to vote properly. It brings back memories of liberal vs. conservative ideology debates on internet forums.

Things sure have changed in the last decade.

Hi PoliGAF, just posting another link to another political thread I made that I'd like some feedback on

A+ thread. Will read again.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Wow, I haven't seen the word neocon used as a pejorative term since like when Al Gore didn't get to be president because Florida didn't know how to vote properly. It brings back memories of liberal vs. conservative ideology debates on internet forums.

Things sure have changed in the last decade.

It's mostly because both the Teabaggers and Liberals hate them.

 

[TacticalFox88]

It seems this thread will run it's course in about 5 pages. (10 for you 50 post heathens!). Who's making the new thread now that Panther Is banned?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

It seems this thread will run it's course in about 5 pages. (10 for you 50 post heathens!). Who's making the new thread now that Panther Is banned?

25th Amendment states it goes to Rusty via order of succession.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Wow, I haven't seen the word neocon used as a pejorative term

I didn't use neocon as a pejorative. It is a real thing and dictated much of GWB's foreign policy adventures.

 

[ReBurn]

I didn't use neocon as a pejorative. It is a real thing and dictated much of GWB's foreign policy adventures.

I guess it was the close proximity to the word teabagger that threw me off. My bad.

 

[GhaleonEB]

It seems this thread will run it's course in about 5 pages. (10 for you 50 post heathens!). Who's making the new thread now that Panther Is banned?

What did he get banned for?

 

[ToxicAdam]

I guess it was the close proximity to the word teabagger that threw me off. My bad.

I didn't say tea bagger either. No problem.

 

[speculawyer]

Herman Cain's 999 plan is absolutely dreadful.

The fact that someone could even suggest it tells you that there is something wrong with our politics. We have a huge government with the most massive military on the planet. We are in at least one war.

You can't pay for all that shit with 9 9 9! The only one up there that has the right to say something like that is Ron Paul because he sincerely wants to cut everything. The rest of them whine about spending but never cut anything when given a chance. All they cut is taxes thus driving the government into bankruptcy.

 

[ReBurn]

I didn't say tea bagger either.

Holy crap! Double my bad.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Holy crap! Double my bad.

Yep that was me who said it. lol

 

[Chichikov]

Hi PoliGAF, just posting another link to another political thread I made that I'd like some feedback on:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=444005

I think we should strive to make our laws readable and understandable by the common man.
And while I, being a software engineer, find reading pesudo-code to be easy and intuitive, I don't think too many people in this country will find it readable.

I do agree with you that we can and should be using technology more.

 

[Opiate]

The competition is on again, for those interested. Compete to create the new OP (and Title) of the PoliGaf thread!

I would be particularly interested in submissions from conservative leaning individuals on this board.

If your submission is chosen, you will receive a PoliGaf champion tag for the remainder of the year.

Please post your submissions here. The winner will be chosen both by popular consensus and by my own personal discretion.

 

[SoulPlaya]

Pretty grand, coming from adherants who believe their deity was tortured and executed. Christians should be vehemently anti-torture and anti-execution just based on those articles of belief alone.

To be fair, just because they call themselves "Christian", doesn't mean that they are.

 

[Something Wicked]

-Seems like Newt is in the race as by orders from the GOP Old Guard to make sure the real candidates keep things a bit civil and not give Obama too much ammo against them for next year.

-Perry is clearly not the GOP's pick. Those comparing him to Bush are off too. Bush was not nearly as arrogant and confrontational, and more importantly, Perry does not have the established GOP connections GWB had. He'll get the Tea Party votes, but the total number of registered Republicans far out number such votes.

-Santorum is irrelevant, Bachmann is now irrelevant with Perry in the race, and Ron Paul is just... yeah...

-While I don't agree with his AGW position, Huntsman is obviously one of the more intelligent and honest candidates. However, intelligence and honesty do not get you elected as President of the United States. VP, on the other hand, perhaps... though I'd actually consider Cain as VP. The GOP should tell him to drop that ridiculous 9-9-9 crap, keep referencing his experience in business, and start agreeing with Romney a bit more. I did like that Cain was the more honest on what must eventually happen with Social Security. Also from a political perspective, having an African America as a VP candidate may chip away at Obama's virtual stranglehold on the black vote.

-Romney is in it to win it and he most likely will- the Republican primary at least. He's playing the game as any politician that wants to win should- the right amount of specific pledges and vague slogans which the general public will be comfortable with.

 

[besada]

So, I only saw the first five minutes of the debate before company came over. I have it on the DVR, but I'm curious if there was a consensus opinion in here regarding winners and losers. I already saw that Perry compared himself to Gailileo, and am eager to enjoy the context of that ridiculous statement. Any other stand out crazy?

 

[Measley]

Someone should send this to the GOP:

These amendments reaffirm the commitment of our government to the performance and stability of social security. It was nearly 50 years ago when, under the leadership of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the American people reached a great turning point, setting up the social security system. F.D.R. spoke then of an era of startling industrial changes that tended more and more to make life insecure. It was his belief that the system can furnish only a base upon which each one of our citizens may build his individual security through his own individual efforts. Today we reaffirm Franklin Roosevelt's commitment that social security must always provide a secure and stable base so that older Americans may live in dignity.

-Ronald Reagan, April 1983

http://www.ssa.gov/history/reaganstmts.html#dib

 

[speculawyer]

If you want to torture yourself with that debate, you can get the MP3 here:
http://www.ronpaul2012podcast.com/2...an-presidential-debate-simi-valley-ca-972011/

They sure let the crazy out tonight.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

If you want to torture yourself with that debate, you can get the MP3 here:
http://www.ronpaul2012podcast.com/2...an-presidential-debate-simi-valley-ca-972011/

They sure let the crazy out tonight.

I'll wait for an autotune version.

 

[Oblivion]

Hey guyz. I missed the whole debate sadly, and was just following along reading the wonderful commentary from poligaf. Typical republican idiocy aside, is it worth watching? Did the moderator at the very least do even REMOTELY a good job pushing back at these asshats?

 

[speculawyer]

Hey guyz. I missed the whole debate sadly, and was just following along reading the wonderful commentary from poligaf. Typical republican idiocy aside, is it worth watching? Did the moderator at the very least do even REMOTELY a good job pushing back at these asshats?

Actually . . . yes, they did OK.

There were some points where they asked a question and got an long-winded non-response . . . and then they just asked the same question highlighting the fact that the person did not answer the question that was asked.

And Ron Paul got poked for his craziness. Really, Ron Paul? No regulation of medicines? No air traffic control?

 

[TacticalFox88]

Hey guyz. I missed the whole debate sadly, and was just following along reading the wonderful commentary from poligaf. Typical republican idiocy aside, is it worth watching? Did the moderator at the very least do even REMOTELY a good job pushing back at these asshats?

No. Not even close. They were dreadful, like always. The only thing they did was Brian chastising the audience for clapping at Perry's execution record.

 

[besada]

I would love to know what was being said right there.

This photo needs a caption contest.

 

[speculawyer]

I would love to know what was being said right there.

I don't know but I look at that picture and think "Rick Perry is an asshole."