open All Channels
seplocked Out of Pod Experience
blankseplocked Firing squad
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic

Amitious Turkey
Gallente
TarNec
Posted - 2010.06.20 00:49:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: Ak'athra J'ador
Originally by: Amitious Turkey

I'll reignite itTwisted Evil
There is one simple thing you're forgetting, Ak'athra. That is, criminals don't care about the law.
If you take guns away from law-abiding citizens, they don't have any protection against the criminals who still have guns and the means to get them. By the time the police got to the scene of a crime, all of the action is already over, because the law abiding citizen got shot in the two minutes it took the police to arrive.


you are thinking in a very limited fashion (as in what lies in my backyard).I didn't say it would be better for you or for me, or even for our children and grandchildren. it would take a while, but eventually the mentality would change, but you cant possibly expect it to change in a stagnant system, where everyone believes everyone else has a gun. no wonder you keep shooting each-other. and we will continue to shoot each-other as long as guns are present.

take a tank for example. nobody has one at home, it is something only the military posses. and they aren't that uncommon or expensive, every army has one. yet a person does not even consider buying one. its in the mentality, and it is the same with guns.

look I understand. your a good guy. you would only use your gun and kill a person to protect your children/wife. but you are encouraging a society where killing a person is acceptable, and you are teaching that to those children.

one day you child dies at the end of a gun, its partially your fault, you encouraged it.

Originally by: Amitious Turkey

But it might be different in Europe simply because their old people outnumber their young people, and the young people are coming from Muslim countries because they have huge families.


ammm what?




Heh, the last bit would need more explanation than what the forum character limit can give me. So, we'll drop that bit.

As for the gun thing...It's more like, there will always be people who want to kill other people, no matter how hard you try to remove that mentality. And killing in self defense is different from murder. Murder is killing someone for any reason other than self defense. It's murder that's wrong. Killing (in self defense) is a necessary evil, because humanity is innately flawed.

Even if you did get the whole society to accept a completely different mentality toward the weapon, like the tank, you'd still have people who want to kill each other. The only difference then would be that the weaker ones would be slaughtered, because they don't have guns (turning the whole thing into yet another dictatorship). Some people will inevitably think murder is acceptable, no matter where you are or what you do. Might as well be ready for them.
Even if you got a whole nation to be completely peaceful, with no crime anywhere, with no guns, they'd immediately be taken over by a country that wasn't so peaceful. Once the army's defeated, the citizens are screwed, unless they have weapons of their own (as was the case in the American Revolution). Basically, you can't change human nature (doesn't mean you shouldn't try, but recognize humanity's limits, what they will or will not do).
If everyone believes everyone else has (or might have) a gun, everyone respects everyone else. The criminals are less likely to commit crime if they think they might get shot up by their victims. A good example of this is in Washington DC, nicknamed "Murder Capital", where no guns at all are allowed.
I remember something I read once about the scariest sound a criminal can hear. The scariest sound was that of a pump-action shotgun Laughing
Do you believe there is an innate right for every human being to defend himself? That's what is embodied in America's 2nd Amendment in the Constitution. It's also so the people have some kind of defense against their own government should it become corrupt. You take guns away, you take the peoples' power away.

Enjoyable debate, btw.

Flyirian
Posted - 2010.06.20 01:30:00 - [62]
 

Life is not a priviledge, its a right no matter what you do or are. You wanna **** it up? Your choice. Then you have a ****ed up life between 4 walls but you still have your life.

Executions in the US costs taxpayers MILLIONS of Dollars, and the decision is irreversible. If you get the wrong guy you cant make the error undone, executions are also a nice way for people or the state to get rid of opponents. But hey, if it is so expensive to keep a few people locked up you should look where all the money went, everyone knows where you can find it.

Asperath Fernandez
Posted - 2010.06.20 07:30:00 - [63]
 

Edited by: Asperath Fernandez on 20/06/2010 07:31:31
Originally by: ChaeDoc II
Originally by: Victor Valka
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
Originally by: Ulhass
So i guess the first man in 14 years to be executed by firing squad in the United States is taking place in one minute...


Any country with death penalty is a nation still with a foot in the dark ages.
You're a reasonable person, from what I've seen on the forums, and I'm actually interested why you'd hold such an opinion -- why are you against death penalty?

I support it. Assuming that guilt has been proven beyond all shadow of doubt, death penalty is more humane then a lifelong incarceration will ever be. I don't see the benefit of lifelong torture paid for with taxpayers money, and people who truly deserve it do not care about the consequences of their actions anyways -- what the method of punishment will be is irrelevant to them.

(Death penalty is abolished in my country, just for the reference.)



Can't see how anyone could think that execution is more humane than incarceration. Just seems like a rather silly attempt by the pro-death penalty lobby to appeal to the liberalism od the anti-death penalty lobby. And i find it funny that the pro-death penalty use "incarceration costs the taxpayer money" as one of the reasons it's a good thing, as is saving money is a good reason to kill people. Rolling Eyes


Curious. You ever been incarcerated?

Not so much the "Martha, I got another DUI in the Prius" type, but, the "Welp. Shoulda known better than to try to rob that bank." decade+ type.

I have a feeling you have not....

Derovius Vaden
Posted - 2010.06.20 07:31:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Malcanis
On a side note, what country are you from? The odds are very very good indeed that your country was fine with slavery until a century or two ago, and that it did a lot less to put an end to slavery than mine did.


Uh, no. I'm Canadian, we've never had official slavery in any way, shape or form.

Quote:
Executions in the US costs taxpayers MILLIONS of Dollars, and the decision is irreversible. If you get the wrong guy you cant make the error undone, executions are also a nice way for people or the state to get rid of opponents. But hey, if it is so expensive to keep a few people locked up you should look where all the money went, everyone knows where you can find it.


They're expensive because of all the back and forth about the legal system ensuring that they have the right guy. Appeals, motions, etc. Quite frankly, if cost is such a concern for you we can have them build an earthen mound behind the courthouse and put a bullet in the condemned 5 minutes after the verdict. How much do bullets cost again? a few pennies if bought in bulk?

Flyirian
Posted - 2010.06.20 09:06:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Derovius Vaden

Quote:
Executions in the US costs taxpayers MILLIONS of Dollars, and the decision is irreversible. If you get the wrong guy you cant make the error undone, executions are also a nice way for people or the state to get rid of opponents. But hey, if it is so expensive to keep a few people locked up you should look where all the money went, everyone knows where you can find it.


They're expensive because of all the back and forth about the legal system ensuring that they have the right guy. Appeals, motions, etc. Quite frankly, if cost is such a concern for you we can have them build an earthen mound behind the courthouse and put a bullet in the condemned 5 minutes after the verdict. How much do bullets cost again? a few pennies if bought in bulk?


I've already heard of that somewhere, now how many centuries do you want to go back?

ChaeDoc II
Gallente
Sigillum Militum Xpisti
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2010.06.20 13:48:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Asperath Fernandez
Edited by: Asperath Fernandez on 20/06/2010 07:31:31
Originally by: ChaeDoc II



Can't see how anyone could think that execution is more humane than incarceration. Just seems like a rather silly attempt by the pro-death penalty lobby to appeal to the liberalism od the anti-death penalty lobby. And i find it funny that the pro-death penalty use "incarceration costs the taxpayer money" as one of the reasons it's a good thing, as is saving money is a good reason to kill people. Rolling Eyes


Curious. You ever been incarcerated?

Not so much the "Martha, I got another DUI in the Prius" type, but, the "Welp. Shoulda known better than to try to rob that bank." decade+ type.

I have a feeling you have not....


No. Have you ever been executed?
If not, how can you know it's more humane?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.06.20 14:09:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 20/06/2010 14:14:19
Originally by: ChaeDoc II
Originally by: Asperath Fernandez
Originally by: ChaeDoc II

Can't see how anyone could think that execution is more humane than incarceration.

Curious. You ever been incarcerated?

No. Have you ever been executed?

Laughing

Quote:
If not, how can you know it's more humane?

It actually varies from person to person.

While the majority would probably prefer life in prison initially, a few might not be quite so sure after a couple of years... but there are others who would rather risk a high chance of dying than go to prison even for a few years, let alone the rest of their lives.
The fact the latter group are usually people that actually served time in prisons before should tell you something. You know, hint, hint...

I suppose it does depend on the prison itself a lot too, and especially the people in it with (the ones which you'll be having contact with anyway).
Some prisons might actually result in a slow, painful death (as opposed to a more "humane" death, since you're so fond of the term), and most prisons aren't exactly what you'd call tolerable either way, even ignoring the actual risk of death.
Heck, you could argue some SLAVES had it better than some prisoners nowadays, especially in periods of time where needlessly hurting your slaves was frowned upon.

So, no, neither of you can possibly know which is more "humane", because no universal answer exists.
The only thing that's certain is that death is kind of irreversible.

Dian'h Might
Minmatar
Cash and Cargo Liberators Incorporated
Posted - 2010.06.20 14:42:00 - [68]
 

If there was a law in place that said any murder would result in the death penalty, unless it happened on a Friday, in which case the max penalty would be life in prison, when do you think most of the murders would happen?

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.06.20 15:23:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Dian'h Might
If there was a law in place that said any murder would result in the death penalty, unless it happened on a Friday, in which case the max penalty would be life in prison, when do you think most of the murders would happen?

Probably no change considering the nature of most murders.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.06.20 15:28:00 - [70]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 20/06/2010 15:31:56
Originally by: Dian'h Might
If there was a law in place that said any murder would result in the death penalty, unless it happened on a Friday, in which case the max penalty would be life in prison, when do you think most of the murders would happen?

Mondays.
Laughing


P.S. Allegedly, in reality, Saturday is the day most murders happen, followed closely by Fridays.

"August was the most popular month to be murdered, followed by March and October. Saturday was the most popular day-of-the-week to be murdered, followed by Friday. Murder rates are higher in the afternoon than in the morning, but are highest at night -- climbing steadily from 6 pm, peaking at 11 pm and declining thereafter."

Flyirian
Posted - 2010.06.20 15:40:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: So Sensational
Originally by: Dian'h Might
If there was a law in place that said any murder would result in the death penalty, unless it happened on a Friday, in which case the max penalty would be life in prison, when do you think most of the murders would happen?

Probably no change considering the nature of most murders.


murder =/= homicide

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.06.20 15:47:00 - [72]
 

Now that we're speaking of the death penalty... somebody before said the death penalty is not a deterrent... and I kind of ignored the issue. But you know what ?
data - homicides 1970-2007 by age group
data - executions 1930-2009
normalized graph
It looks like executions ARE a relatively decent deterrent.

So Sensational
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.06.20 15:51:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Flyirian
Originally by: So Sensational
Originally by: Dian'h Might
If there was a law in place that said any murder would result in the death penalty, unless it happened on a Friday, in which case the max penalty would be life in prison, when do you think most of the murders would happen?

Probably no change considering the nature of most murders.


murder =/= homicide

I concede.

Zenkai
Gallente
TOASTED Corp
Sev3rance
Posted - 2010.06.20 16:52:00 - [74]
 

Edited by: Zenkai on 20/06/2010 16:57:32
What is with these people who cling to the unsubstantiated assumption that human life is precious? It's a simple math equation.

Example: 6,828,477,898 is the total human population (http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html)
and the total number of deaths in the world in relation to births is 2.5:1 in the favor of births per 1000 people (CIA world fact book). So Y=(X/1000)*2.5 or Y= 17071194.745 and thatís per year.
So even with to total number of deaths in this crazy F'ed up world WE ARE STILL MAKING MORE UNITS THEN ARE BEING DESTROYIED! If you liquidate a defective model you can have solace in the fact that by the end of this yearís production run you will have seventeen million seventy-one thousand one hundred and ninety-four replacements. Think about that... I mean really think on it 7 Billion humans with 17 Million on the way so how precious is the existence of one Rapist or one murder, really in the big scheme of things?
What the people who are agienst capital punishment should do is admit is the reason they are against it is that they themselves have no stomach for it. They assume, wrongly mind you, that if they canít bring themselves to do something ďItís not right and by golley there should be a law!Ē But things like this need to be done, nay, have to be done for the good of all. And if you canít stomach it, avert your eyes and let the real men do what necessary.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.06.20 17:25:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Zenkai
What is with these people who cling to the unsubstantiated assumption that human life is precious? It's a simple math equation.

"Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god."
-- Jean Rostand, Thoughts of a Biologist (1939)

Vogue
Short Bus Pole Dancers
Posted - 2010.06.20 18:07:00 - [76]
 

Thread tangent wee!

Maybe deities wants a planet with as many people as possible on it-

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2010.06.20 18:42:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Now that we're speaking of the death penalty... somebody before said the death penalty is not a deterrent... and I kind of ignored the issue. But you know what ?
data - homicides 1970-2007 by age group
data - executions 1930-2009
normalized graph
It looks like executions ARE a relatively decent deterrent.



Oh, c'mon akita. You're a hardcore enough internets warrior, surely you know correlation does not imply causation. Murder rates going up can be linked to any number of things; organized crime, illicit drug trade, the rise of the brady bunch. Rolling Eyes

Derovius Vaden
Posted - 2010.06.20 19:41:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: Chaos Incarnate
Originally by: Akita T
Now that we're speaking of the death penalty... somebody before said the death penalty is not a deterrent... and I kind of ignored the issue. But you know what ?
data - homicides 1970-2007 by age group
data - executions 1930-2009
normalized graph
It looks like executions ARE a relatively decent deterrent.



Oh, c'mon akita. You're a hardcore enough internets warrior, surely you know correlation does not imply causation. Murder rates going up can be linked to any number of things; organized crime, illicit drug trade, the rise of the brady bunch. Rolling Eyes


You've obviously failed statistics (or should have) if you think that anything you just pointed out can be quantified. Rise of the Brady Bunch? Whats that a binary statistic? Yes/No? Akita has presented numbers, and whether or not they can be validated from an impartial source or not, they are still one step above the rest of the arguments in here.

Alternatively you could provide statistics on the number of false imprisonments or botched executions (gone awry or wrong guy, etc.).

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.06.20 20:21:00 - [79]
 

Originally by: Chaos Incarnate
surely you know correlation does not imply causation. Murder rates going up can be linked to any number of things; organized crime, illicit drug trade, the rise of the brady bunch. Rolling Eyes

On one hand, it might not imply it (in the sense of "it's the only logical conclusion"), but on the other hand, it sure does suggest it (as in, there is a case to be made about the death penalty MAYBE having an effect on homicide rates).
On the gripping hand, for those claiming that instituting the death penalty will certainly result in more homicides, or that removing the death penalty will certainly result in less homicides, those numbers are a slap in the face.

stoicfaux
Gallente
Posted - 2010.06.20 20:44:00 - [80]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Edited by: Akita T on 18/06/2010 11:12:04

I would only have three types of punishment, ever :
* fines (as a combo of fixed amount plus percent of networth plus percent of recent income),
* limited-time slavery-like indentured servitude (for those that can't pay the fines even with loans, i.e. those unable to become wage-slaves),
* and death (for those that can't properly serve as slave-a-likes for some reason, be it bad behaviour as a slave or inability to do anything useful as a slave).


You forgot about public humiliation (being pilloried in the stocks) and quick and dirty punishments (caning).

The indentured servitude while very tempting, is probably a bad idea. I wouldn't trust the government with any kind of institutionalized slavery/servitude due to how easily and how badly it can be abused.

Quote:
Prison is for wishy-washies. Long live modern slavery. Death to the criminally useless.
Don't want to be fined/enslaved/killed ? DON'T COMMIT CRIMES.


Which is great right up until you a) start defining what a crime is and b) realize who does the defining (politicians that pander to the irrational mobs and or lobbyists.) At least prisons cost money which gets the attention of taxpayers, who may start to ask questions if a ridiculous amount of people are being incarcerated. When there aren't any prisons, people tend to ask less questions about why so many socially unpopular people are disappearing.


Originally by: Ak'athra J'ador

but you must understand what the fact that anyone can have a gun does to the mentality of people.



Yes. You'll find that people are less likely to suffer under a dictatorship and that they're noticeably less inclined to submit to slavery.

On the flip side, have you seen what happens to the mentality of people who realize that their happy, well-adjusted neighbors are unarmed?



As for the death penalty in general, I believe that there are people who commit crimes so heinous that they should be taken out behind the barn, shot in the back of the head, and their bodies left for the wild dogs. However, despite our best safeguards, we do occasionally execute an innocent person. I believe that an innocent man's life is much more valuable than the deaths of a hundred murders, so I would tend to favor life imprisonment instead of the death penalty except in the most extreme of cases. Unfortunately, people tend to have wildly differing interpretations of extreme, so I think we're better off with just banning the death penalty.


Torque Daisy
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2010.06.20 20:47:00 - [81]
 

doesn't the US have like tons of blacks in prison who produce goods that are sold or something.


Amitious Turkey
Gallente
TarNec
Posted - 2010.06.21 03:25:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: Torque Daisy
doesn't the US have like tons of blacks in prison who produce goods that are sold or something.




wat?

Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2010.06.21 05:56:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Derovius Vaden
You've obviously failed statistics (or should have) if you think that anything you just pointed out can be quantified.


I never said they could be easily quantified; in fact, i know they really can't be (it's not as if you can nicely ask all the organized crime groups to nicely hand over their per-year headcounts and sales figures). The point is, there are a number of things that alter the murder rates, many of which are difficult to plot on a graph because either the figures aren't available or accurate, or it's pretty difficult to
-

Do you think that because you can't nicely or easily plot them out on a graph it means they can't have noticeable impacts on the murder rate?

Quote:
Rise of the Brady Bunch? Whats that a binary statistic? Yes/No?


The sarcastic/comedy option, meant to point out a simple truth: murder rates are dependent upon a number of things; social, economic, gang/organized crime activity, political, racial tensions, etc. To assign significant blame to any one attribute would be a critical failure of understanding.
Quote:

Akita has presented numbers, and whether or not they can be validated from an impartial source or not, they are still one step above the rest of the arguments in here.

They're from the department of justice, so I don't dispute the numbers; i dispute the conclusions based upon them. As to whether or not providing numbers has enriched the discussion, I think providing bad numbers with poor conclusions is worse than just having an opinion. In the latter case, at least, it's fairly easy to accept that you can be wrong. Rolling Eyes

Originally by: Akita T
On one hand, it might not imply it (in the sense of "it's the only logical conclusion"), but on the other hand, it sure does suggest it (as in, there is a case to be made about the death penalty MAYBE having an effect on homicide rates).

Sure, it might suggest it; but i don't think you could establish anything beyond a tenuous link.
Quote:

On the gripping hand, for those claiming that instituting the death penalty will certainly result in more homicides, or that removing the death penalty will certainly result in less homicides, those numbers are a slap in the face.



I don't know anyone who makes either of those points, really.


Pages: 1 2 [3]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only