why I can't quite nix the death penalty entirely

[MagisterCultuum]

It works pretty well if the goal is to kill people.

Not always though. Executions occasionally fail.

Wasn't the recent supreme court case on capital punishment related to a man who was given a lethal injection but survived, and reported excruciating pain?

The court ruled it was not cruel and unusual punishment to use that drug. Part of the reasoning was that the plaintive did not suggest an alternative method of execution that would be less cruel while also not being too hard for the jurisdiction to implement. Of course such alternatives do exist and could have been used, and it just seems lazy of the judges not to consider alternatives that the lawyers neglected to mention. Nitrogen Asphyxiation is the obvious choice for giving a painless death.

 

[sophie]

No it isn't. The goal is to enforce laws by carrying out threats of punishment. If knew I could steal from Donald Trump and not be punished for it I would do so. It is only the threat of punishment that makes me not do so.

Wow. You are a terrible human being.

 

[Perfection]

Wow. You are a terrible human being.

What the heck makes you jump to that conclusion?

Stealing from the rich and stupid is wrong even if it registers as much as a mosquito biting a dinosaur might. But, I mean, I see what you're saying, I can picture a completely moral Jesus-like figure stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. But it's really for the most part a case of someone with a not so quite evolved moral compass - or someone with an overly advanced moral compass. And the latter is usually discounted because not everyone can be be Jesus or Robin Hood.

In my mindset Donald Trump is a particularly obnoxious individual who will use his wealth for disgusting purposes. Simply burning his money would make the world a better place, but I would find valuable uses for it.

 

[Akka]

A word of advice, when your view of what the just thing to do in a situation corresponds with that of a vindictive child murderer it may be prudent to reanalyze it.

Hitler liked sugar. Obviously sugar is distateful.
Stalin punished thiefs. Obviously theft should be legal.

Your argument is stupid.

 

[Borachio]

You guys are completely missing my point, but really it's what I've come to expect here.

I did not say we should only execute perpetrators of henious crimes.

What I said was 1) the death penalty is not practical because it's too costly due to safeguards against executing innocents and 2) in this case I believe those safeguards could be lessened and make it effective.

Why spend money to keep this woman imprisoned when she clearly admits to the crimes, is not remorseful, and will never contribute anything to society ever again?

You think that a person's life should hang in the balance for purely monetary considerations, then?

That seems a very strange stance to take on the issue, imo.

 

[warpus]

In my mindset Donald Trump is a particularly obnoxious individual who will use his wealth for disgusting purposes. Simply burning his money would make the world a better place, but I would find valuable uses for it.

But who are you to make that assessment? What would prevent you from using the same concepts to justify theft from others? Where does it stop?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

But who are you to make that assessment? What would prevent you from using the same concepts to justify theft from others? Where does it stop?

I would propose "Republican presidential candidates" as a reasonable limiter...

 

[Perfection]

Hitler liked sugar. Obviously sugar is distateful.
Stalin punished thiefs. Obviously theft should be legal.

Your argument is stupid.

I never considered it an argument per se, merely a suggestion with the implication that in doing such rethinking an opinion may be changed. The reason for this suggestion is because he's agreeing on an appropriate punishment (her getting the death penalty) with someone who found beating her own children to death an appropriate punishment. Perhaps there's a common error in moral reasoning that can be found. It's not merely that he's agreeing with a "bad person" about anything.

But who are you to make that assessment? What would prevent you from using the same concepts to justify theft from others? Where does it stop?

Who is anyone to make any moral assessment? I don't believe in ultimate moral authority.

There's no clear boundaries. And if I could get away with Donald Trump perhaps I would be tempted to steal in less clear cut states. I don't think any of this is a reflection of a deep moral flaw I possess requiring rehabilitation but the general state people find themselves in. But if we all were allowed to persue those actions the order of society would break down.

It is for that reason we need laws backed with the threat of punishment.

 

[Farm Boy]

Nitrogen Asphyxiation is the obvious choice for giving a painless death.

Several close range bullets to the back of the head work really well too. Or, why not, two close range bullets to the back of the head and a couple guys firing blanks. But that's too hard to watch for people who demand death sentences while remaining squeamish about the reality.

 

[LucyDuke]

I suspect it's people that are relatively ambivalent about such sentences (like our OP) that are too squeamish about the reality. There are plenty of people that are gung-ho for execution that wouldn't mind watching or participating in every one.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I suspect it's people that are relatively ambivalent about such sentences (like our OP) that are too squeamish about the reality. There are plenty of people that are gung-ho for execution that wouldn't mind watching or participating in every one.

Until they saw one. Especially if they saw a messy one, like close range bullets to the back of the head. On the other hand, I see no benefits to the death penalty and the only fresh kill I've ever seen was effectively beaten to death with a tiled wall, and I suffered no squeamishness effects, so I don't think my disapproval of the idea is based in squeamishness.

 

[LucyDuke]

Maybe. I dunno. I hope it would be a reality check, but people can be pretty nasty.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Not always though. Executions occasionally fail.

Wasn't the recent supreme court case on capital punishment related to a man who was given a lethal injection but survived, and reported excruciating pain?

The court ruled it was not cruel and unusual punishment to use that drug. Part of the reasoning was that the plaintive did not suggest an alternative method of execution that would be less cruel while also not being too hard for the jurisdiction to implement. Of course such alternatives do exist and could have been used, and it just seems lazy of the judges not to consider alternatives that the lawyers neglected to mention. Nitrogen Asphyxiation is the obvious choice for giving a painless death.

Or we can simply discount what reactionary authoritarian members of the Supreme Court have to say about anything. They are no more representative of a modern democratic society than Mussolini was.