scar tissue
Banned
So...maybe let's just make prison a little more rape-safe (right now, rape is more or less condoned/expected, which is supremely fucked up) and double check the life sentences?
Instead of just killing 'em all.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Last Meals Of Innocent Men
- Thread starter Joel Was Right
- Start date
- Status
So...maybe let's just make prison a little more rape-safe (right now, rape is more or less condoned/expected, which is supremely fucked up) and double check the life sentences?
Instead of just killing 'em all.
Omegasquash
Member
I'm not sure what you're getting at with this statement...you're advocating a stronger justice system with a small/nil margin of error, I think.
Is there any evidence that this is working?
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Nope.
There's even the argument that the very existence of capital punishment will make criminals do worse things.
If murdering one man is going to most likely kill you, what's stopping you from killing 2-3 more?
What I am trying to say, and this is what I said 10 posts ago, we should be focusing on fixing our system. That way won't have innocent people being thrown into jail.
Getting rid of CP isn't a solution, because innocent people will still end up being thrown in jail. Do you get it? You fix a problem by tackling the roots, not the branches.
morningbus
Serious Sam is a wicked gahbidge series for chowdaheads.
It's really hard to track it, because there are so many factors.
That's why I propose we institute the death penalty for all minor traffic violations. Let's see how many people drive over the speed limit now!
SquiddyCracker
Banned
I think he gets it, and accept life imprisonment of an innocent preferable to the capital punishment of an innocent.
LyleLanley
Banned
I agree with that but I don't think we'll ever get to a point where no innocent person ends up in jail. I'm not saying we shouldn't strive for that though.
So, we should get rid of CP, and then call it a day? That is a lazy solution.
Omegasquash
Member
Which...is what I said I thought.
I like your tree analogy, but I take the stance that we need to do both, in a way. Execution shouldn't be an option at all UNTIL our justice system is fixed. That goes all over the place, from NY Rockefeller drug laws (thanks, NPR) to Texas judges itchy to tie a noose.
I'll toss in my own analogy here. You want to make sure a car doesn't fall off a cliff before you build a bridge. Stop the traffic while the work is being done. They're part and parcel to one another. Building that bridge, in this case, is going to take a ton of work and while that work is being done, CP should NOT be an option. Incarceration for (alleged) violent offenders is much better than killing them, and incarceration for even those wrongly accused is better than killing them.
Again, I'm FOR the death penalty, but we cannot execute a person the way our justice system currently works. It needs to be off the table until we get there.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
In a discussion on capital punishment, saying that you want to get rid of if it as it is less preferable than life-imprisonment of innocents is a suitable enough solution.
Doesn't mean that the same person thinks that's all that needs to be changed when it comes to the prison system.
Surely getting rid of capital punishment is at least part of the solution, no? Sure, fix the the root of the problem and try to keep innocent people from winding up in jail. But we're never going to have a system in which innocent people cannot end up in jail. And we can't really make that right if the accused are dead, can we?
Until we can implement a perfect criminal justice system (hmmmm....), don't you think we should put a hold on the death penalty?
Good point, and I would be in favor of a plan like that. But I am afraid of the consequences of removing that penalty (will crime increase?), and God knows how long it will take to fix our broken system..
Synth_floyd
Banned
Get rid of the death penalty. There's no good reason for it. It's not cheaper. It's not just. People make mistakes. Especially with the racist justice system we have.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
What would those consequences be, and would they be worse than innocents getting killed?
Synth_floyd
Banned
The reason the death penalty exists is because it "feels right." If someone does something bad to you, then you should do something bad to them. But that kind of thinking is a childish joke. And is open to abuses and biases of society. The US is still a society where irrational thinking sways too many people which is why bullshit like this is still around. Same thing why gay marriage is illegal in most states. "Gay people getting married? Yuck"
Gentleman Jack
Member
THANK you, christ. I thought I was going crazy with how that remark sailed by three pages of the thread.
'10 mistakes' = ten innocent lives taken. And those are the ones we know about. If you find that an acceptable tradeoff for satisfying some crazed bloodlust for criminals then you are a psychopath.
If I had to guess, people might be more willing to commit a crime, knowing that they are just going to end up being thrown in jail. But that is just a guess. We won't find out until we try, but I am not looking forward to it. haha
In Islam, killing an innocent person is equal to murdering all of mankind. Believe me, I wouldn't want an innocent man to be executed, but I also don't want corruption to spread..
Omegasquash
Member
We'll just respectfully disagree on that, then (no worries). My stance is that the death penalty is not a deterrent AND it costs plenty more AND still leaves a stain when an innocent man or woman is executed.
Killing all of the 100% confirmed beyond the shadow of a doubt murderers and whatever other crime we may think warrants the death penalty CANNOT bring one innocent life back. That one innocent life is too important.
This is the most deplorable post I've read in all my years on GAF.
This is a cute sentiment but how true, if at all, is this? Thinking of society at large is inherently dehumanizing (a mass of people make it impractical to determine individual impact, ergo reducing a person or persons importance to a statistical sum of a whole), so when you rationalize for the "good" of society, what metric do you use?
8 mistakes, 992 pieces of shit killed?
"This is a cute sentiment but how true, if at all, is this? Thinking of society at large is inherently dehumanizing (a mass of people make it impractical to determine individual impact, ergo reducing a person or persons importance to a statistical sum of a whole), so when you rationalize for the "good" of society, what metric do you use?"
Remember that we don't HAVE to have any additional innocent lives lost through capital punishment. We aren't starting with an unavoidable number of innocent deaths, and then adjusting up or down. Without capital punishment, zero innocent people will be lost to capital punishment. Putting in place policy that makes it possible for the state to murder innocent people is different than changing policy so that we move between 19, 20, or 21 innocent deaths a year, right?
Exactly. He doesn't understand that we can actually execute all murderers - some before they even commit their crimes - if we're willing to think bigger in terms of acceptable collateral damage.
"If you want to make an omelet, you're going to have to break a few eggs. And strangle a few random chickens. And maybe accidentally shoot a farmer..."
scar tissue
Banned
Yeah, we've had incest defense force (Sennorin :lol), chicken rape defense force and the like, but this one really takes the crown.
Of course but that is beside the point. I suppose another way to look at it is this: is the goal of society to make itself better, efficient, etc? Or is it to protect innocent life at all costs?
If you can disassociate those two factors, then you can prioritize one relative to the other.
It seems that the major point of this discussion is the current system of capital punishment leading to innocent death, and not an ethical consideration on whether there should be state sanctioned killings of guilty criminals.
Count Dookkake
Member
Would make for a great theme restaurant.
"Are you hungry... for justice?"
"Are you hungry... for justice?"
AdventureRacing
Member
There are countries other than America and that has been tried.
Claude Howard Jones (Texas)
my man
Best.
I think if you're concerned about the cost of justice, you need to focus on the lower-hanging fruit first. For example, blitz away the ludicrous privatisation of prison services; remove the financial incentives that result in the US having a frankly obscene prisoner per capita ratio.
The thing I find baffling is how quick the US seems to be to disenfranchise its own people. I prefer to think of "the state" as having a duty of care for all it's citizens, even those guilty of crimes. A compassionate government should protect the innocent from the guilty while still protecting the guilty from the innocent.
The thing I find baffling is how quick the US seems to be to disenfranchise its own people. I prefer to think of "the state" as having a duty of care for all it's citizens, even those guilty of crimes. A compassionate government should protect the innocent from the guilty while still protecting the guilty from the innocent.
Messypandas
Member
Omegasquash
Member
Are you suggesting that we do not strive for a criminal justice system that doesn't execute innocent people?
LyleLanley
Banned
That's a great video.
crowphoenix
Banned
While I agree with you, pulling the mentally handicapped to their (and mine on occasion) level is just rude.
As a fellow Canadian, I gotta say. You.Are.Fucked.
Lets just kill dem innocents to satiate my bloodlust amirite?
Messypandas
Member
This attitude is unconsciousable, seriously what the hell is wrong with you?
Baraka in the White House
2-Terms of Kombat
And if you or someone you care about is one of the 10?
CornBurrito
Member
I don't think YOU understand. He is saying your attitude of "lol who cares if innocent people die?" is dark ages.
I like how this post implies eye witness testimony is reliable when the muddled memories of eye witnesses is basically the #1 reason for false convictions.
CornBurrito
Member
dp
Omegasquash
Member
And further along I also put forward that it can't just be eye witness testimony. That said, I should remove that as a qualification. Audio/visual evidence would likely serve the purpose better.
No. I am questioning the claim that any perceived net positive to society by "something" is immediately undone if an innocent is killed.
Obviously we want to limit wrongful deaths on its own terms. I'm not saying it's okay that these men died.
Angry Fork
Member
The human sacrifice supporters in here are ridiculous, even if you knew beyond a shadow of a doubt someone was guilty, like there were video cameras, pictures etc. and all it STILL shouldn't happen. Keep revenge in movies/tv not real life.
Life in prison does just as much as death (although I don't like blanket life in prison decisions either), capital punishment is unnecessary state violence/eye for an eye bullshit for the purpose of making people feel better.
Life in prison does just as much as death (although I don't like blanket life in prison decisions either), capital punishment is unnecessary state violence/eye for an eye bullshit for the purpose of making people feel better.
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/death-by-fire/
Death By Fire
This shit genuinely got me angry
Texas authority(way up to Rick Perry) straight up in denial and actively ignore clear evidence to execute Cameron.
Straight up bloodthirst.
Death By Fire
This shit genuinely got me angry
Texas authority(way up to Rick Perry) straight up in denial and actively ignore clear evidence to execute Cameron.
Straight up bloodthirst.
Omegasquash
Member
Yes, but the execution of an innocent person is not worth making sure you got the other 99. Likewise, it is not worth killing 99 if it means that you'll kill one innocent person. Additionally, our system (for lack of a better word) does not function well enough in my opnion to effectively convict beyond the shadow of a doubt. And it HAS to be beyond the shadow of a doubt if you're going to kill someone. At least...it ought to be.
Being OK with wrongful execution to make sure that bad guys still get punishment that we deem appropriate is akin to saying "Kill them all, God will sort them out." It does not undo the removal of a blight on society...it adds to the impact of that blight.
I believe this to be the crux of your argument, and ultimately I agree.
AbsolutBro
Member
I would rather 100 guilty men go free than 1 innocent is made to suffer.
This nonsense about money spent on prisoners or "the luxury life they lead" is just that, nonsense. The desire for capital punishment stems from nothing but a bloodthirsty desire for revenge. To see violence for violence. It's pathetic. Disgusting and pathetic. That you would let one innocent (or in your case 10) people be murdered makes you no better than the people you want to see executed. You are advocating for a system that is literally murdering innocent people, just like the murderers you claim to loathe.
You are practically a living breathing example of Nietzsche's "abyss" comment.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked