Like Tree3Likes

High executioners

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Football16:
    The US has proven now that it costs more to handle the appeal processes leading up to an execution than to incarcerate that person for life.
    Yes, that last comment is certainly true. Of course, that is because the US has such a lengthy and comprehensive appeals process - which isn't a problem in China. It is quite economical to kill people in China, which, of course, is part of the problem. China kills too many people. The US probably doesn't kill enough.

    So I certainly don't agree with Gilly's "barbaric" comments - the idea that we are so 'evolved' that we have become unable to take a human life is ridiculous and is just wish fulfillment. The fact that we are becoming so unwilling to face the consequences of crime and justice is simply a sign of cultural weakness and an unwillingness to deal with difficult issues. I do believe that everyone has a right to an opinion on this, because Gilly's position is essentially a 'moral' one; i.e., i is 'immoral' to take a human life, under any circumstances. However, he can't presume to impose his morality on everyone else in the world, in fact, a 'moral' position taken by someone who is presumably not religious, is a bit of a minomer.

    One reason I admire certain religious types, such as the actor Martin Sheen, is that when they can take a moralist, whose morals are informed by his religious beliefs. He is both anti-death penalty, and anti-abortion. The Pope would take the same position. Even though I strongly disagree on both positions, I admire the philisophical and moral consistency of someone willing to hold them both. My position is, I believe, equally consistent. If, on the other hand, someone takes positions that are not quite as conherent, then they will have a more difficult time making a case that their position is based on a superior set of moral beliefs.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079

    BTW "The Economist" is probably my favorite magazine and this is one of the positions I disagree with them on. They have been foolish enough to publish letters of mine a few times. But abolition of the death penalty is one area that they are a bot too European and sentimental about, in my view. I think it stems from Jeremy Bentham being anti-capital punishment.

    George Orwell's "A Hanging" is one of the best anti-death penalty pieces ever written. Of course, Orwell, and Bentham before him, lived in a time when hangings were very common.

    Last edited by Freetrader; 17-08-2010 at 11:04 PM.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    29,768

    Freetrader: I have always wondered though when you look at the list of countries - China, Egypt, Libya, Bangladesh, Thailand, Botswana, Singapore, North Korea, Malaysia, Japan, Syria, Vietnam, Sudan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran - doesn't it concern you the company the US seems to keep? I mean with very few exceptions that is hardly a list of civilised, democratic countries is it?

    Football16 likes this.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by hullexile:
    Freetrader: I have always wondered though when you look at the list of countries - China, Egypt, Libya, Bangladesh, Thailand, Botswana, Singapore, North Korea, Malaysia, Japan, Syria, Vietnam, Sudan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran - doesn't it concern you the company the US seems to keep? I mean with very few exceptions that is hardly a list of civilised, democratic countries is it?
    The death penalty - like abortion rights - is an issue about which well-meaning people can differ.

    That said, your list is a massive red herring - yes, those countries have the death penalty. So? Does that imply that the legal systems are the same? Of course not - which is why you are showing the list.

    The issue, actually, is a massive case of Euro-centrism. Europeans learned bitterly through two world wars to avoid conflict, which is why Northern Europe has developed this slightly pacifist model. The European diaspora has a habit of mistaking its views for a some concept of justice that needs to be universally applied. The US gave up the death penalty for 10 years, and eventually reversed itself. Abolition of the death penalty does not equate to some higher standard of human progress. It is simply a question of criminal justice policy. And the European model is currently fraying a bit at the edges also.

    Besides: Singapore, Japan, are both great countries,not to mention Taiwan and South Korea (although I don't necessarily agree with their death penalty policies). The Philippines, as you know, also has the death penalty for many crimes, including rape.

    The US justice system is in many ways a disgrace: too many laws, and too many prisoners. The death penalty process in the US is dysfunctional due to the confused legal process (however, the confusion and expense is a result of the need to protect the rights of the prisoners - there has always been a bit of hypocracy in abolitionists using using a utilitarian/cost anti-death penalty argument). However, one shouldn't confuse one's Eurocentric "abolitionlist" views on the death penalty with some concept of universal justice.

    BTW, I thought that Football's digging up that '60s quote - "killing for peace is like f*cking for virginity" kind of funny. Obviously, if people didn't f*ck once in awhile, eventually there wouldn't be any more virgins.
    Last edited by Freetrader; 18-08-2010 at 08:44 AM.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079

    It may also be worth mentioning that the rule in the US is that the death penalty is an issue that is determined by the States, not by the federal government. The Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was not unconstitutional, but it is issue that is up to the States to impose (within constitutional constraints). Almost all executions in the US are in two states: Texas and Florida. Since in the US there are no restrictions on moving from State to State, any potential death penalty candidates are free to move to a non-death penalty state (e.g., New York) if they are concerned about it being applied to them.


  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    14,624

    Still, the US has the Death Penalty and clearly a very high crime rate, hence the death penalty isn't a deterrent...

    The Death Penalty is pretty useless and barabaric, I'm with Gilles on that one. It isnt a sign of being weak or not weak....

    and on "The US justice system is in many ways a disgrace: too many laws, and too many prisoners". -> there are as many prisoners as there are offenders. if they could behave as instructed by the laws, they wouldnt be prisoners.


  7. #17

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,905

    Death penalty comes down to this... Society says it's wrong to kill so we'll kill you for murder... The equivalent of a drunk parent telling a child not to drink.

    Much of your reasoning is based on the assumption that all prisoners are guilty which is clearly not the case. Even in a country with a decent justice system as the US, the poor have the deck stacked against them and many are convicted with less than stellar legal representation.

    Yes there is too much crime and there are too many prisoners. One needs to look at the root causes to treat it and not at the legal system.

    Abortion is a different matter because it boils down to a definition of what a human life is...Is an 8 week foetus a sentient being? I don't believe so, the religious think so but in the end there's no way to really know.

    You could very well throw euthanasia in the mix. Is it right to have medical personnel facilitate someone's death if they are terminal and suffering?

    As to linking morality and religion, that is a very stupid statement. You can have one without the other.

    Obviously right and wrong are often based on one's set of values and perspective. Then you link up those values and perceptions with other groups of people and you start having what is acceptable or not in a society. Most of the developed world feel that the death penalty is not appropriate however it appears that most americans think it is thought many have reservations on the process.

    It does become somewhat hypocritical to negatively comment on the scale and scope of the death penalty in China if you support your own brand this type of justice in your own country though...


  8. #18

    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,772

    I'm a bit skeptical about those numbers, I mean how can we know the number of executions in a secretive country like North Korea? Certainly not from their official statistics.


  9. #19

    Aussie male, currently living overseas in Bangkok, Thailand. Loves surfing, travelling and mountain biking.


  10. #20

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    29,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Freetrader:
    The death penalty - like abortion rights - is an issue about which well-meaning people can differ.

    That said, your list is a massive red herring - yes, those countries have the death penalty. So? Does that imply that the legal systems are the same? Of course not - which is why you are showing the list.

    The issue, actually, is a massive case of Euro-centrism. Europeans learned bitterly through two world wars to avoid conflict, which is why Northern Europe has developed this slightly pacifist model. The European diaspora has a habit of mistaking its views for a some concept of justice that needs to be universally applied. The US gave up the death penalty for 10 years, and eventually reversed itself. Abolition of the death penalty does not equate to some higher standard of human progress. It is simply a question of criminal justice policy. And the European model is currently fraying a bit at the edges also.

    Besides: Singapore, Japan, are both great countries,not to mention Taiwan and South Korea (although I don't necessarily agree with their death penalty policies). The Philippines, as you know, also has the death penalty for many crimes, including rape.

    The US justice system is in many ways a disgrace: too many laws, and too many prisoners. The death penalty process in the US is dysfunctional due to the confused legal process (however, the confusion and expense is a result of the need to protect the rights of the prisoners - there has always been a bit of hypocracy in abolitionists using using a utilitarian/cost anti-death penalty argument). However, one shouldn't confuse one's Eurocentric "abolitionlist" views on the death penalty with some concept of universal justice.

    BTW, I thought that Football's digging up that '60s quote - "killing for peace is like f*cking for virginity" kind of funny. Obviously, if people didn't f*ck once in awhile, eventually there wouldn't be any more virgins.
    The list came from the first post which showed the countries that have used the death penalty and there was no selective approach applied. The Philippines abolished the death penalty (for the second time) in 2006. They have not got round to removing all the notices warning visitors that drug smuggling carries the death penalty though.

    The eurocentric argument is interesting and valid as we are all influenced by our cultures. Of course the majority of non-European countries do not apply the death penalty. My arguments against the death penalty are: (i) the risk of killing an innocent - many many cases in the UK of people being convicted of murder and then proven to be innocent 10, 20 years later, even after the full appeals process, (ii) I have always thought it is wrong to deliberately kill someone and (iii) from a religious point of view of course "Thou shalt not kill". (and I know the Old Testament has thousands of cases of death penalties before anyone jumps in with that, but that is the Old not the New).

    I accept the US (or their states as you point out) has the right to decide its own penal system but I still think it is wrong and ineffective, so we will have to agree to disagree. I guess a country with such a high murder rate might feel the need for it more than others.