djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2014 17:40:09 GMT -5
And if a person is found in a court of law to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt, they should be granted the opportunity of filing appeals. not if you think that process is perfect. do you?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 17:55:42 GMT -5
You are correct. I am NOT "seriously advocating torture machines". I am advocating PUNISHMENT that fits the crime... most women think that rape is a form of torture. agree or disagree? Agree... and disagree. Agree that if it wasn't "asked for" it's torture... However, if one does the crime one "asks for" the punishment. I'll say it one more time: Don't want the punishment? Don't do the crime. ... Seriously... How hard is that to understand?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 17:56:34 GMT -5
Until they escape... or some judge overturns their "life" sentence, and they get parole... or something else happens that allows them to walk free. how many times has that happened for prisoners rightfully sentenced to LWOPP? i believe the answer is "none". it has ONLY happened in cases where prisoners were WRONGFULLY convicted. So far. Doesn't mean it CAN'T happen in the future.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 18:00:08 GMT -5
And if a person is found in a court of law to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt, they should be granted the opportunity of filing appeals. But not for 20 to 30 years.... All appeals should be done and over with in under a year (and they should all be done at the same time. The lawyer knows what he didn't like at teh Trial that may even be worthy of being "appeal worthy"). Then, if still guilty... carry out the sentence.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2014 18:02:28 GMT -5
most women think that rape is a form of torture. agree or disagree? Agree... and disagree. Agree that if it wasn't "asked for" it's torture... rape is, by definition, not asked for. so, i will take that as "agree".However, if one does the crime one "asks for" the punishment. i wasn't asking you about the punishment. i was asking you about the crime.I'll say it one more time: Don't want the punishment? Don't do the crime. ... Seriously... How hard is that to understand? i will say it again- criminals are not thinking about the punishment, because they are not thinking about being caught. how hard is that to understand?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2014 18:04:19 GMT -5
how many times has that happened for prisoners rightfully sentenced to LWOPP? i believe the answer is "none". it has ONLY happened in cases where prisoners were WRONGFULLY convicted. So far. Doesn't mean it CAN'T happen in the future. no. but it DOES mean that you are speculating about possible outcomes rather than actual problems. that must keep you very busy. edit: i will wager my CERTAINTY that a man will be wrongfully sentenced to death over your SPECULATION that he might escape.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 18:22:00 GMT -5
Agree... and disagree. Agree that if it wasn't "asked for" it's torture... rape is, by definition, not asked for. so, i will take that as "agree".However, if one does the crime one "asks for" the punishment. i wasn't asking you about the punishment. i was asking you about the crime.I'll say it one more time: Don't want the punishment? Don't do the crime. ... Seriously... How hard is that to understand? i will say it again- criminals are not thinking about the punishment, because they are not thinking about being caught. how hard is that to understand? Whether they are "thinking about it" or not is irrelevant. They know it's a crime, they know there is a penalty if they are caught. As to your bolded insertions... You didn't specify the punishment or the crime... you specified "rape", since one of the punishments I would advocate is "if you rape, you get raped"... my answer HAS to apply to BOTH scenarios, "un-asked for" and "asked for". (for the record, women can rape too)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 18:24:52 GMT -5
So far. Doesn't mean it CAN'T happen in the future. no. but it DOES mean that you are speculating about possible outcomes rather than actual problems. that must keep you very busy. edit: i will wager my CERTAINTY that a man will be wrongfully sentenced to death over your SPECULATION that he might escape. You are very likely correct in your edit. What can I say.. I like to be prepared for anything. It's the "Boy Scout" in me.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2014 18:35:02 GMT -5
i will say it again- criminals are not thinking about the punishment, because they are not thinking about being caught. how hard is that to understand? Whether they are "thinking about it" or not is irrelevant. They know it's a crime, they know there is a penalty if they are caught. true. i mistakenly thought that you believed this would be a deterrent. my apologies.As to your bolded insertions... You didn't specify the punishment or the crime... you specified "rape", since one of the punishments I would advocate is "if you rape, you get raped"... my answer HAS to apply to BOTH scenarios, "un-asked for" and "asked for". sorry if i was unclear. but i disagree that punishment is "asked for" in the legal sense of the term. most criminals would rather not be punished. you are using "asked for" as a synonym for "deserved". i wasn't. no woman "deserves" rape, imo. i was using it as a synonym for "requests".(for the record, women can rape too) of course. i was just playing the odds.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 27, 2014 18:36:09 GMT -5
no. but it DOES mean that you are speculating about possible outcomes rather than actual problems. that must keep you very busy. edit: i will wager my CERTAINTY that a man will be wrongfully sentenced to death over your SPECULATION that he might escape. You are very likely correct in your edit. What can I say.. I like to be prepared for anything. It's the "Boy Scout" in me. so long as you preparations don't impact the person or property of a non-consenting other, you are welcome to them.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Jul 27, 2014 18:48:41 GMT -5
And if a person is found in a court of law to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt, they should not be granted the opportunity of filing appeals. Are you fucking serious?
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Jul 27, 2014 18:52:34 GMT -5
And if a person is found in a court of law to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt, they should be granted the opportunity of filing appeals. But not for 20 to 30 years.... All appeals should be done and over with in under a year (and they should all be done at the same time. The lawyer knows what he didn't like at teh Trial that may even be worthy of being "appeal worthy"). Then, if still guilty... carry out the sentence. Are you fucking serious as well?
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Jul 27, 2014 18:55:20 GMT -5
Good thing these two aren't in charge of the legal system or no telling how many innocent people would be dead now.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 19:22:37 GMT -5
Whether they are "thinking about it" or not is irrelevant. They know it's a crime, they know there is a penalty if they are caught. true. i mistakenly thought that you believed this would be a deterrent. my apologies.As to your bolded insertions... You didn't specify the punishment or the crime... you specified "rape", since one of the punishments I would advocate is "if you rape, you get raped"... my answer HAS to apply to BOTH scenarios, "un-asked for" and "asked for". sorry if i was unclear. but i disagree that punishment is "asked for" in the legal sense of the term. most criminals would rather not be punished. you are using "asked for" as a synonym for "deserved". i wasn't. no woman "deserves" rape, imo. i was using it as a synonym for "requests".(for the record, women can rape too) of course. i was just playing the odds. You were using "asked for" incorrectly then. Not my problem. If you do the crime, you are asking for the penalty. Not directly. But you are making a choice. You are deciding that the possible penalty is worth it to commit the crime. And I do believe harsher penalties would be a deterrent... at least to a percentage of the criminal element. To me, SOME less is better than NO less.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 19:25:57 GMT -5
Good thing these two aren't in charge of the legal system or no telling how many innocent people would be dead now. If I was in charge, no innocent people would be dead... remember, one of my criteria for a death penalty is "unimpeachable guilt". Severe penalties should only be used if guilt is without question... not the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard, the "NO doubt what-so-ever" standard.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 19:27:19 GMT -5
But not for 20 to 30 years.... All appeals should be done and over with in under a year (and they should all be done at the same time. The lawyer knows what he didn't like at teh Trial that may even be worthy of being "appeal worthy"). Then, if still guilty... carry out the sentence. Are you fucking serious as well? If I'm fucking... I'm serious about it. I'm a guy. (not sure what sex has to do with the conversation at hand though...)
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Jul 27, 2014 19:52:35 GMT -5
You said appeals done and over in under a year, and I think you have no idea what a death penalty legal trajectory involves. I know, and even under the best of circumstances it takes years and years.
If that isn't acceptable to you- then you need to repeal the Bill of Rights. The government executing a citizen is not supposed to be easy- in fact it should be the highest legal hurdle- which you agree with. So sticking with that maybe you have some sympathy for people that were beat with a phone book into confessing or worse.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Jul 27, 2014 20:28:23 GMT -5
Horse shit.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 20:35:03 GMT -5
You said appeals done and over in under a year, and I think you have no idea what a death penalty legal trajectory involves. I know, and even under the best of circumstances it takes years and years.
If that isn't acceptable to you- then you need to repeal the Bill of Rights. The government executing a citizen is not supposed to be easy- in fact it should be the highest legal hurdle- which you agree with. So sticking with that maybe you have some sympathy for people that were beat with a phone book into confessing or worse. Where did I say "easy"? I don't recall ever suggesting that. I also don't recall suggesting beatings to get a confession. I also don't recall suggesting rushing the ORIGINAL case. You are reading a WHOLE lot of stuff into my post that doesn't exist when compared to what I actually said. The court system COULD "fast track" appeals (schedule them for 1 month later instead of two years later, just for example)... if they wanted to. Appeals don't hear the whole case over again. they only deal with the item that's appealed.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Jul 27, 2014 20:41:20 GMT -5
Please stop confusing facts with rhetoric.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 22:32:31 GMT -5
With my beliefs, there is no way in heck anyone could ever convince me that death is anything other than a reward.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2014 22:55:58 GMT -5
With my beliefs, there is no way in heck anyone could ever convince me that death is anything other than a reward. islamic extremist?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2014 8:27:32 GMT -5
I really don't have the energy to have the smoking statistics debate again. Slate wrote an excellent article on it a few years ago. Title was something like 'The Jihad Against Smoking'. The basic premise is smoking related death statistics are wildly inaccurate and always reported in the most sensational light. For example, take lung cancer. 2% of the non smoking population gets lung cancer. 6% of regular smokers get lung cancer. The press never reports it that way, they report that smokers are 300% more likely to get lung cancer, which is true, but purposefully reported using the biggest scariest number they could come up with. Also, coroners and medical professionals are required to list smoking as a possible cause of death (which is then included in the smoking related death statistics) for any person who dies from anything that smoking is a risk factor for. So, for example, if an old guy dies of a heart attack and he was a smoker they'll list smoking as a possible cause of death, even if the guy has a family history of heart problems, and all the old guys in his family die of heart complications, regardless of whether they smoke. In his case did the smoking cause the heart attack? Who the fuck knows, but in the official statistics he's a smoking related death. Nobody really knows which percentage of cases like that the person in question would have died from cancer, heart disease, or whatever even if they'd never smoked. The way the statistics are compiled if you die of damn near anything, and you smoked at some point in your life, you're likely to be counted as a death caused by smoking. I'm not saying that smoking is healthy. It's a nasty habit that's bad for your health. However, the stats everyone loves to cite are inflated, and smoking isn't as bad for you as the public is usually led to believe. The truth is the medical community can't really say how detrimental smoking is to your health. It's definitely detrimental, there's nobody who really doubts that, but how detrimental is nearly impossible to determine, and currently over reported. So 3x as many people who smoke get lung cancer, but it's nearly impossible to determine how detrimental it is ? How often it's reported changes those stats how ?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 4:16:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2014 8:56:25 GMT -5
Agreed, humans aren't perfect. Screw ups will happen again and again. That's life in this world, I'm used to it. If you can't accept the fallibility of humans, you are not going to be a happy camper and stress will be your constant companion. This screw up was preventable and was due to inadequate input from medical professionals. There was no backup plan. People had no idea what to do when the guy didnt die. They stood around in total bewilderment. This was sloppiness, not error. Sorry you dont see the difference. Additionally, while I am now retired, I worked in a high-stress job (anesthesia) for most of my working life and handled it just fine. Thanks for your concern, though. Even though it is completely unnecessary. Sloppiness is an error, as the job wasn't done correctly. So I don't see what difference you're talking about. Medical professionals should stay out of the killing business, it really isn't their line of work. Don't they take an oath or something ? Things like this supposedly botched execution wouldn't happen if you used professionals that know how to kill instead of jury rigging medical equipment and chemicals that were designed and intended for life saving.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,514
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 28, 2014 9:13:43 GMT -5
Hal: [after Del's execution] WHAT IN THE BLUE FUCK WAS THAT? There's puke all over the floor up there. And that smell! I had Van Hayes open both doors but that smell's not going out for five damn years that's what I'm bettin'. And that asshole, Wharton, is singing about it. You can hear him up there! Paul Edgecomb: Can he carry a tune? Hal: Okay, boys, what in the hell happened? Paul Edgecomb: An execution. A successful one. Hal: How in the name of Christ can you call that a success? Paul Edgecomb: Eduard Delacroix is dead.[to Percy] Paul Edgecomb: Isn't he? The Green Mile
|
|
greeniis10
Well-Known Member
Joined: May 9, 2012 12:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 1,833
|
Post by greeniis10 on Jul 28, 2014 9:21:26 GMT -5
Not picking on you specifically, Shaun, but it's been mentioned a couple of times on this thread about uneducated or untrained prison employees. I can't speak for everywhere, of course, but at the prison DS2 works at they are trained extensively (and continually) in both medical care and procedures and they have to pass rigorous target practices of varying weapons, targets, and conditions every 6 months. Doesn't matter how long you've worked there, if you don't pass your shooting tests, you're gone. DS2 never had any interest in the medical field prior to this job, but he's learned so much that he's fascinated by it now. Not to mention has gotten over his queasiness around blood and guts, since that is a regular feature of this job. I'll have to ask him what they've been told recently about the lethal injection messes. Please dont take offense on behalf of your son. I made a comment about that earlier. It is not meant as a slight to the staff employee. Even if your son is highly proficient in starting IVs, etc., he is not going to be the one (nor is any ordinary staff person) responsible for the selection of which drugs will be used. That is going to be a decision way above his paygrade, and judging by the results, it is apparent that persons lacking sufficient knowledge chose this drug combo. I could do it better myself. So could Shooby and other nurses here, even those without anesthesia training. I wouldnt, but I could. It actually is very easy to kill someone with the drugs we have today, just those used in the OR daily, so to botch things up this badly seems to require someone with NO idea what they are doing. I cant believe they had any medical input. Even highly proficient persons with recent practice may have off moments under pressure. Who knows if all prisons have staff with recent practice or who is used in the execution process. I dont. My ex was a Corrections Officer. No insult was intended on my part. I apologize if what I said seemed to be one. Oh, NO apologies needed, but thank you! I do appreciate the response. I took a 3-day weekend and have been off the computer since Thursday, so clearly I have a LOT to catch up on here...
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 28, 2014 10:56:44 GMT -5
of course. i was just playing the odds. You were using "asked for" incorrectly then. Not my problem. setting my usage aside, we both agree that people don't ask to be raped, right? rape is, by definition, NOT consensual. agreed? edit: i still think that "asked for" is synonymous with "consent to", for the record. but i already apologized for being unclear.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 28, 2014 10:59:18 GMT -5
And I do believe harsher penalties would be a deterrent... at least to a percentage of the criminal element. To me, SOME less is better than NO less. that is because you don't think like a criminal. not my problem. the so-called "deterrent effect" is not really a measurable phenomena, from what i can tell. particularly for capital crimes.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 28, 2014 11:00:55 GMT -5
Good thing these two aren't in charge of the legal system or no telling how many innocent people would be dead now. If I was in charge, no innocent people would be dead... remember, one of my criteria for a death penalty is "unimpeachable guilt". how would you determine this? edit: some people think guilty beyond reasonable doubt is sufficient. you apparently don't. what would meet your "unimpeachable" standard?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 28, 2014 11:36:28 GMT -5
We all agreed on firing squad? A consensus? Wow. I was worried this might be the 53rd thread where the same pro- and anti-DP arguments from all previous threads were regurgitated like a thick paste, doomed to never coalesce into a meaningful consensus. But firing squads provide a respectable balance of finality and mercy, cost and efficiency, harshness and leniency. I'm glad we could all agree on this in spite of some posters' desire for criminal suffering, some posters' ethical objections to state-sanctioned killing, and various other hangups that rendered the previous 51 debates pointless. At long last we have a successful thread! Good work, team! Since the issue is now resolved, I am off to other threads, never to return to this one. But I will always remember it as proof that message boards can sway people's opinions on fundamental issues, and I shall think back on it fondly.
|
|