|
Post by Sandafluffoid on Mar 7, 2009 18:04:19 GMT -5
Ok Sky, I'm gettign a vaguely pro-death penalty vibe from this, but jsut to see if you can: Do you support the death penalty for serial killers? Yes/No As a yes/no question, that's completely unreasonable. So's the death penalty *zing* [/saving face]
|
|
|
Post by Angel Kaida on Mar 7, 2009 18:07:15 GMT -5
As a yes/no question, that's completely unreasonable. So's the death penalty *zing* [/saving face] It just looked like a trap. But then he was like, "yes." No qualifications. Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by ausador on Mar 7, 2009 18:19:48 GMT -5
See the problem is that some have never grown past that whole "eye for an eye" thing. Even though the immense and ponderous slowness and inaccuracy of the legal system make it laughable at best, some people still cling to it. Does it really matter if we finally put someone quietly to sleep 14 or 15 years after he commits some heinous act? What is the point, what are we proveing, who are we deterring?
As Sandafluffoid said it is simple institutionalized murder, or as I prefer to care it revenge killing, just like in the bad old days when clans slaughtered one another one by one...
We can ensure that if that person is in fact guilty he will never again be released from prison, I see no reason to kill him except that it makes certain neanderthal types feel good.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Mar 7, 2009 18:59:33 GMT -5
Realistically, a person given life in prison without parole is going to a supermax prison.
If he's on death row, he has, what, an average of twelve years of appeals to be exonerated. If he's not, of course, he dies.
If he spends twelve years in a supermax - if he *survives* 12 years in a supermax - he's going to be a wreck. Those places are horrible. Torturous. You aren't doing him any favors by putting him in there. You think someone can come out of a place like that and live anything like a normal life? I'm sure it *could* happen. I don't think it's real likely to happen.
You can argue the barbarity of the death penalty, but I think it's possible to argue that putting an innocent person in such a prison for decades is even more barbarous.
And what if our innocent person is never proven as such? You've just tortured a man for his whole life instead of at least killing him cleanly.
|
|
|
Post by Sandafluffoid on Mar 7, 2009 19:02:31 GMT -5
Realistically, a person given life in prison without parole is going to a supermax prison. If he's on death row, he has, what, an average of twelve years of appeals to be exonerated. If he's not, of course, he dies. If he spends twelve years in a supermax - if he *survives* 12 years in a supermax - he's going to be a wreck. Those places are horrible. Torturous. You aren't doing him any favors by putting him in there. You think someone can come out of a place like that and live anything like a normal life? I'm sure it *could* happen. I don't think it's real likely to happen. You can argue the barbarity of the death penalty, but I think it's possible to argue that putting an innocent person in such a prison for decades is even more barbarous. And what if our innocent person is never proven as such? You've just tortured a man for his whole life instead of at least killing him cleanly. American Supermaxes are shitholes, I'm nto denying it. Prisons need to be reformed, but being too poor or too lazy to reform prisons isn't an excuse for murder.
|
|
|
Post by MaybeNever on Mar 7, 2009 19:12:33 GMT -5
Realistically, a person given life in prison without parole is going to a supermax prison. If he's on death row, he has, what, an average of twelve years of appeals to be exonerated. If he's not, of course, he dies. If he spends twelve years in a supermax - if he *survives* 12 years in a supermax - he's going to be a wreck. Those places are horrible. Torturous. You aren't doing him any favors by putting him in there. You think someone can come out of a place like that and live anything like a normal life? I'm sure it *could* happen. I don't think it's real likely to happen. You can argue the barbarity of the death penalty, but I think it's possible to argue that putting an innocent person in such a prison for decades is even more barbarous. And what if our innocent person is never proven as such? You've just tortured a man for his whole life instead of at least killing him cleanly. American Supermaxes are shitholes, I'm nto denying it. Prisons need to be reformed, but being too poor or too lazy to reform prisons isn't an excuse for murder. And yet altogether I think I'd rather put an innocent man to death than stick him in a supermax for the rest of his life. Prison reform is a necessity, and I would probably revise my thinking on this part of the issue if that reform were to happen. Unless and until it does (and I'm not holding my breath), I guess this'll be an agree to disagree kind of situation.
|
|
|
Post by erictheblue on Mar 7, 2009 20:01:28 GMT -5
This is the way I see it...
Feral animals with no possibility of rehabilitation are put down. It's done in a humane manner, but they are removed from the possibility of harming themselves or others.
If we do it for animals, why not feral animals who wear human faces?
Do I believe that the death penalty is used too often? Yes, I do. But for people like the BTK Killer, or the DC snipers, they have lost all claim to humanity, and we need to treat them like the animals they are.
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 7, 2009 20:41:18 GMT -5
American Supermaxes are shitholes, I'm nto denying it. Prisons need to be reformed, but being too poor or too lazy to reform prisons isn't an excuse for murder. It's not so much poverty or laziness as it is "some areas use the brutal condition of their prisons as a deterrent factor." There's two main avenues by which this takes place. The first one is prison rape; the other is the internal code of honor among inmates. ** If you've ever seen references in American-produced series to inmates raping one another, it's the actual, tragic truth. Inmates locked away for a long enough period of time, regardless of gender, often become homosexual. For some inmates, it's because they're sex-starved and homosexuality is the only option. For others, it's because being paired up with an intimidating, dominating fellow inmate is a means of keeping alive until they get released. Regardless of the hows and whys, it's alarmingly common for inmates to vent their sexual frustrations on their fellow inmates, and in such a situation the venting inmates don't give a damn as to whether or not the other person is willing. The infamous phrase "don't drop the soap" actually came about because of the number of instances wherein an inmate in the communal showers dropped their soap and was anally violated while bending over to retrieve it. Thus, the threat of being raped in prison is enough to deter some would-be criminals from doing their crimes. ** Contrary to popular belief, if a person studies prisons in America often enough they will uncover that there is an almost unspoken honor code among the inmates. Regardless of how bad the hatred is between factions within a prison, members of each faction will band together against one of the following three groups: [1] Inmates who inform the guards about what the other inmates are doing. [2] Former police officers or other law enforcement officials who end up arrested. [3] People whose crimes involved hurting children. Child molesters, child pornographers, and the like often have very short lifespans while in prison. This is because their fellow inmates will take any and every opportunity to make their lives hell as punishment for their hurting children. As a result, the person is left in a situation to where they either have to stay in general population and take the abuse or request a transfer to the mental hell that is solitary confinement and stay there for extended stretches at a time... which can be just as bad, as solitary is populated by both inmates who need to be protected from other inmates and inmates who are too violent to be among other inmates. And yes, these people are indeed periodically murdered, often in a creative fashion. For example, one of the Catholic priests who went down for child abuse ended up getting murdered by another inmate who was wielding a bar of soap; no details ever came out as to how. Another instance I've heard about (although admittedly second-hand) involved some inmates somehow getting their hands on a stick of dynamite or similar explosive, sodomizing the victim with it, and lighting the fuse. Note that 90% of this was learned in my high school intro to CJ class. The teacher had worked in the prison system and so had quite a few stories to tell...
|
|
|
Post by mnstrm on Mar 7, 2009 21:24:06 GMT -5
Umm Skyfire, you know that what you've posted above isn't going to be new information to people here, right? You know that it's pretty much common knowledge that rape and/or consensual sex occurs between inmates, don't you? And ditto the prison attitude towards molesters.
Also, you should probably rethink your assertion that inmates "often become homosexual". People are either gay or they're not. Engaging in homosexual activities because the situation warrants that does not mean an individual has "become gay".
|
|
|
Post by brendanjd on Mar 7, 2009 21:33:23 GMT -5
@ Skyfire:
We had a guy up here in Canada. His name was David Milgaard. He was convicted in the 70's for raping and brutally murdering a young nurse. He was given a life sentence, no parole.
In the 90's it was discovered through DNA evidence that he was not, after all, the killer. Some fucked named Larry Fisher was.
If the DP was still legal when David was convicted, I have no doubt that he would have been hung like a dog.
That's why I'm against the DP. It's too sure. There is no going back. Say what you want about revolving door prisons, but to use the DP is simply barbaric.
|
|
|
Post by erictheblue on Mar 7, 2009 21:50:28 GMT -5
@ Skyfire: We had a guy up here in Canada. His name was David Milgaard. He was convicted in the 70's for raping and brutally murdering a young nurse. He was given a life sentence, no parole. In the 90's it was discovered through DNA evidence that he was not, after all, the killer. Some fucked named Larry Fisher was. If the DP was still legal when David was convicted, I have no doubt that he would have been hung like a dog. That's why I'm against the DP. It's too sure. There is no going back. Say what you want about revolving door prisons, but to use the DP is simply barbaric. I highlighted very important parts of your post. I'm not saying that DNA evidence is perfect. But the use of DNA evidence should, over time, drastically reduce the number of wrongful convictions.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Mar 7, 2009 21:59:16 GMT -5
Hey Sky...you were doing very well until you went into that whole prison rape thing. Should've stopped before you went overboard.
As for this bloodthirsty 'raptor, I am all for the Death Penalty in cases where it is clear cut the guy(or girl) did it. First offense, multiple offenses, doesn't matter to me. You go on a killing spree and there is no evidence that can ever exonerate you, once you've exhausted your appeals get ready for a looooooooong stint in a hot place.
I'm also all for the death penalty for child murders and rapists. Though the rapist part can be dropped due to the face that most immates consider child rapists the lowest of scum and usually go out their way to shank 'em in the chow line.
Ironbite-at least that's what I've always thought.
|
|
|
Post by Shano on Mar 7, 2009 22:39:06 GMT -5
@ Skyfire: We had a guy up here in Canada. His name was David Milgaard. He was convicted in the 70's for raping and brutally murdering a young nurse. He was given a life sentence, no parole. In the 90's it was discovered through DNA evidence that he was not, after all, the killer. Some fucked named Larry Fisher was. If the DP was still legal when David was convicted, I have no doubt that he would have been hung like a dog. That's why I'm against the DP. It's too sure. There is no going back. Say what you want about revolving door prisons, but to use the DP is simply barbaric. I highlighted very important parts of your post. I'm not saying that DNA evidence is perfect. But the use of DNA evidence should, over time, drastically reduce the number of wrongful convictions. But even DNA testing isn't foolproof and/or perfect. Short of mindreading I don't see a "perfect proof" of someone's guilt and even mindreading can have problems. So imo the possibility of making an error will always exist. In addition my view is that response to unlawful actions must be corrective and not punitive. The current view is that people who perform actions that the contemporary social contract considers worthy of life sentence/DP are incorrigible and probably beyond being able to contribute to society. That point I disagree with. It is true that current correction methods are very far from ensuring any social incorporation of said people. That doesn't mean it won't exist ever. On top of that I think any person can contribute to the advancement of society.
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 7, 2009 23:08:08 GMT -5
Hey Sky...you were doing very well until you went into that whole prison rape thing. Should've stopped before you went overboard. Just ensuring that everyone was clear on the point. BTW, what I said was actually quite mundane compared to what can show up in even the intro CJ classes. One of my brothers was a CJ major, and the prof for his intro class made it a point to do a slide show of the most disturbing pictures he can find for the sake of weeding out any students who weren't strong enough to handle the job. Turns out that you can, indeed, kill someone with a spoon...
|
|
|
Post by ausador on Mar 7, 2009 23:34:20 GMT -5
Easier to kill them with a pencil...
A spoon you have to shape into a shank first.
Yes I have first hand experience, not book learning.
|
|