Botched execution in OK

[Wakeforest22890]

So the answer is to execute people faster now to increase the deterrence. I'll refer back to my first post on the thread which says we have a two pronged problem and people really just focus on the second one: humanity and efficiency of the state sanctioned killing rather than the first one: ensuring that no innocent person is murdered by that same state institution.

 

[PhDeac]

Bullshit. Executing people doesn't cost a lot of money. Giving death row inmates endless appellate rights does.

So it's about costs not safety.

 

[RJKarl]

Bullshit. Executing people doesn't cost a lot of money. Giving death row inmates endless appellate rights does.

Then you must be for executing innocent people. Hundreds of innocent people have been freed from death row in the US.

I guess your blood lust is such that if a few innocent people die for crimes they didn't commit, so be it.

 

[tjcmd]

I don't understand why it's necessary to execute anybody save anybody else.

If you could have executed Himmler after his first few killings you would not have done so because your conscience would not allow it?

 

[bigdoublezero]

If you could have executed Himmler after his first few killings you would not have done so because your conscience would not allow it?

This could be the dumbest post ever on the Tunnels.

 

[19deac92]

Let's just go back to using prison colonies in remote, desolate locations for the worst of the worst, where we can banish individuals whom we have determined cannot be rehabilitated. Perhaps some of our islands in the Aleutians (Attu or Kiska) or maybe Cleveland (assuming that could survive an 8th Amendment challenge).

 

[ImTheCaptain]

So it's about costs not safety.

is it that morally repugnant to execute someone based on the fact that it's cheaper than a lifetime of imprisonment?

 

[bigdoublezero]

Let's just go back to using prison colonies in remote, desolate locations for the worst of the worst, where we can banish individuals whom we have determined cannot be rehabilitated. Perhaps some of our islands in the Aleutians (Attu or Kiska) or maybe Cleveland (assuming that could survive an 8th Amendment challenge).

Yeah, and like 100 years later we get New Australia. Worth it.

 

[ImTheCaptain]

Yeah, and like 100 years later we get New Australia. Worth it.

 

[Milhouse]

is it that morally repugnant to execute someone based on the fact that it's cheaper than a lifetime of imprisonment?

no

 

[jhmd2000]

is it that morally repugnant to abort someone based on the fact that it's cheaper than a lifetime of subsistence dependency?

FIFY

 

[bym051d]

You are kidding, right?

That's fine. I could be wrong. I'd like to see the study.

I figure most murders are typically one of two.

1. Crime of passion - largely unplanned
2. Crime of opportunity - largely unplanned

The crimes that are pre-meditated enough that someone plans to execute them in another state have to be a very small portion.

 

[awaken]

I don't understand why it's necessary to execute anybody save anybody else.

because #dronelogic

 

[Billy Mitchell]

There is a lot of good data out there showing that the DP is administered unfairly based on the race of the victim. Essentially, murder a white girl and you'll probably die. Murder a black man and you probably won't.

This is a jury problem, not a system problem. Jurors self-identify with the victim and issue the DP for the crimes they consider most heinous.

This issue alone is enough for me to be against the DP - never mind the fact that using it makes us look like fucking assholes to the rest of the world.

 

[PhDeac]

is it that morally repugnant to execute someone?

Yes.

 

[Milhouse]

meh, if some dude raped and murdered one of my daughters i'd be happy to do it myself.

judge away...

 

[tjcmd]

This could be the dumbest post ever on the Tunnels.

This one here is a pretty dumb post.

 

[bigdoublezero]

This one here is a pretty dumb post.

Good one.

 

[RChildress107]

I am afraid of big government. But one of the few things government should be doing is as much as it can to protect individual citizens from other individual citizens. I am not advocating government killing its citizens. I was just asking a question. If it were possible to save 100 inocent victims by executing Saudi Arabia-style 100 falsely accused criminals I think everyone would say it would be a bad idea. But what if the calculus were 200 to 100 or 300 to 100? Is there some point where you would accept executing some falsely accused criminals in order to save innocent crime vicitms? I am just trying to see where the moral compass is.

No. Utilitarianism sucks.

 

[RJKarl]

" Originally Posted by tjcmd View Post
I am afraid of big government. But one of the few things government should be doing is as much as it can to protect individual citizens from other individual citizens. I am not advocating government killing its citizens. I was just asking a question. If it were possible to save 100 inocent victims by executing Saudi Arabia-style 100 falsely accused criminals I think everyone would say it would be a bad idea. But what if the calculus were 200 to 100 or 300 to 100? Is there some point where you would accept executing some falsely accused criminals in order to save innocent crime vicitms? I am just trying to see where the moral compass is."

Are you really this nuts? In your world it's OK to kill some innocent, wrongly accused people just in case you might save another.

Since it's your idea, how about volunteering to be killed to protect a future victim? How about volunteering your child or wife?

You are willing to have someone else's child, wife or husband murdered. Why not you?