Neither am I, and I believe the later quoted "revenge is mine' sayith the Lord", are part of and concurrent in the same passage. The point here is that, for societies and his sake, he needs to go someplace where he is better suited.

__________________

Belial,

I think that the idea expressed by some who are opposed to the death penalty is that society is lessened or demeaned by the act of executing murderers.

I think that one could reasonably question that assertion.

To draw a practical example, a substantial part of every human is the part that defends the whole body from something which it, the body, find dangerous. We call this the immune system, and without it we die. This is analogous to a substantial portion of society existing to defend the society. We call these the armed forces, traditionally (in democratic societies) separated into those who defend the society from external threats, the Army, Navy, Air Force, etc.; and those who defend society from internal threats, the police. Both groups are controlled by people who are, again in democracies, themselves controlled by the society at large.

Murderers are a group of people who reject society's prohibition of citizens initiating the use of physical force to achieve their aims. Please note that most people who kill are not murderers. Crimes of passion and situations of limited mental capacity exclude most killers from the set of murderers. Murder is, by definition, pre meditated. Each murderer wanted and planned to do it. Thus, as a result, these people have rejected the constraints of their society. They need, therefore, not be accorded the same accommodations that the State makes for its citizens.

This is why, usually, the police and the military report to, and are under control of politicians. It is through the politicians who write the laws that each society realizes both the strengths and weaknesses inherent in itself.

If a society’s laws reflect the mores and beliefs of that society, then one is forced to accept that that society’s laws about capital crimes – and punishments – will reflect that society.

I would then ask if the society of England = France = USA = India = Australia = Canada = Germany? If not, then why would one – why SHOULD one expect their laws to be the same?

__________________
Eudaimonia

vengeance

__________________

The practice of putting women on pedestals began to die out when it was discovered that they could give orders better from there.~ Betty Grable

If I wanted your opinion, I'd remove the duct tape and ask you for it.~ Me
<~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
One man's dream is another man's nightmare~~~~> §¤ Lilith ¤§
~>My Scribbles<~
==>Gone Shopping<== ~Just a Quickie~ *~A Celebration Vacation~* ~Surprises~ Sleeping With the Window Open
What Did You Do Today? Self Defense Class ~Short Sweet Snippets~ § Summer Spin § Story Challenge Submission Pajamas

Lilith,

???

__________________
Eudaimonia

I think (although I am not a scholar in this) the word in the quote is 'vengeance' not revenge...not that it matters... it's only the Bible That part is in Leviticus but they do use the word revenge in Roman's but it's not the saying that most people quote. Usually they are referring to the Leviticus one.

__________________

The practice of putting women on pedestals began to die out when it was discovered that they could give orders better from there.~ Betty Grable

If I wanted your opinion, I'd remove the duct tape and ask you for it.~ Me
<~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>
One man's dream is another man's nightmare~~~~> §¤ Lilith ¤§
~>My Scribbles<~
==>Gone Shopping<== ~Just a Quickie~ *~A Celebration Vacation~* ~Surprises~ Sleeping With the Window Open
What Did You Do Today? Self Defense Class ~Short Sweet Snippets~ § Summer Spin § Story Challenge Submission Pajamas

Murders reject the constraints of their societies. This is true, but should not the constraints of society be reflected in its laws? Therefore, isn't any criminal, as a breacher of those constraints, not entitled to the protection of society? Aren't assaulters and batterers examples of people rejecting society's constraint against the use of physical force to achieve their aims? Should we then authorize the supervised beating of convicts of these crimes by their victims? Is it not somewhat hypocritical of society to breach its very own constraints in the enforcement of those same constraints?

What do we hope to achieve by executing convicted murderers? Vengeance? Seems unlikely; if revenge was an ideal of society, we'd permit normally criminal acts to be justified as the taking of revenge. We don't. Provide a deterrent? Studies consistently show the death penalty does not act as a deterrent, and why would it? Penalties only become part of the equation when the offender is caught, and no-one with the premeditation you describe murders under the belief that they will be caught.

Eliminate the possibility of recidivism? Murderers are the least likely of criminals to become recidivists, yet few, if any crimes correspond to sentences with that sort of permanency. Perhaps one could argue that the crime is so serious that a zero recidivism rate should be sought. So what methods do we use to achieve that?

We pick a jury of peers - and I don't know about you, but honestly, some of my "peers" I'd not trust to use my toilet, let alone decide someone's fate - with no legal training, no proven intelligence quotient, and no proven ability to even pay attention to interpret cases presnted, one by the state, with unparalleled access to the media, and by personnel whose jobs largely depend on the satisfaction of voters desires (I'm sure I don't need to draw a picture connecting these two factors), and another, presented on behalf of the accused, often by an attorney whose salary is paid from the very same budget bankrolling the prosecution (!), and we hope to come out with the correct answer to the question of guilt or innocence, and then, if guilty, whether the accused should be executed or not. Forgive me for not having the greatest of confidence here! Sure, there are avenues of appeal - for those who can afford it - but those are based around points of law and due process, not jury (mis)interpretation, if I recall correctly. I personally believe that any justice system that is not completely capable of self-correction is flawed, and any justice system including scope for the death penalty lacks this capability and is therefore flawed.

Then there's the consideration of the effect the death penalty has on those who enforce it and participate in its machinations. Might it be that after participating in several executions - possibly, being the actual executioner - psychological damage, what some might consider a dehumanizing effect occurs? The more modern of firing squads do not permit their members to be aware of their status, or non-status as the firer of the lethal bullet, loading all but one gun, whose holder is unknown, with blanks.

If you made it this far, thanks for reading. The above reasons are why I oppose the death penalty, as best I could come up with now.

*phew*

__________________
I want to know everything
I want to be everywhere
I want to fuck everyone in the world
I want to do something that matters

just curious here......

How many people here have ever set foot inside a prison, let alone walked down the runs of a death row anywhere. Although everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I respect everyone's opinion as long as they are genuine, until you have been in an actual prison and not watched "oz" or a "48 hours" special it's sarting to feel like a bunch of Monday morning Quarterbacks in here. LOL

Our new cellhouses were built with roll open security windows and no air conditioning because the public preception is that inmates have it "to good" everyone seems to forget there are people in prison that have not been convicted of any crime, and their whole purpose is to protect YOU!

Don't get me wrong, I walk away from work on days hating every last inmate I see, but the fact remains, the public perception puts my life at risk when security features like "environment control" other behavior based rewards/punishment are removed because the public perception.

(stepping off my soapbox and waiting for everyone's opinion)
Please, I want to hear everyone's opinion.

Nightstick26,

Prison yes; DR no.

No kidding guy! One must hope that people will wise up someday.

__________________
Eudaimonia

And the final judgement of the jury is:
http://www.comcast.net/News/DOMESTI...a159f20388.html

Some excerpts:
Jurors decided Monday that John Allen Muhammad should be executed for masterminding the deadly sniper attacks that terrorized the Washington area for three weeks last fall.

The jury's sentencing recommendation is not final. Circuit Judge LeRoy F. Millette Jr. can reduce the punishment to life in prison without parole when Muhammad is formally sentenced, but Virginia judges rarely do that. Sentencing was set for Feb. 12; Virginia death row inmates are executed by injection unless they choose electrocution.

The jury also recommended the maximum sentences of 10 years in prison for conspiracy to murder and three years for using a firearm in a felony.

The jury concluded that prosecutors proved both aggravating factors allowing the death penalty: that Muhammad would pose a danger in the future or that his crimes were wantonly vile. He was sentenced to death on both counts he was convicted of last Monday: multiple murders within three years and murder as part of a terrorist plot.

__________________
On the kinkometer, my kink measures as a sine wave.

Gentlemen, start your appeals!

__________________
Eudaimonia

And to continue teh argument with Belial. And before the issue is confused, this is "argument" in the intellectual sense. I feel no disrespect for Belial personally, and have no wish to convey any such by my wrods here.

To quote Belial:
What do we hope to achieve by executing convicted murderers? (snip) Provide a deterrent? Studies consistently show the death penalty does not act as a deterrent, and why would it?


A half-truth which conceals the fallacy of this argument. While studies do indeed show that the death penalty AS APPLIED in this country is no deterrant, that's not all of the issue. The death penalty provides no deterrent because it takes an average of 7 to 12 YEARS between a conviction and an execution. These same studies consistently show that what does act as a deterrent to crimes in general, including murder, is the swift arrest of the perpetrator.

And to continue quoting:
Eliminate the possibility of recidivism? Murderers are the least likely of criminals to become recidivists

This is wildly inaccurate. Murders are the most likely of criminals to become recidivists; the general rate of recidivism for criminals who have been convicted and served out their sentences in general is around 45-55% (depends on which study you listen too). Murders generally come in at around 70-75%.

It is interesting to note here that a California study found that the group of criminals with the lowest recidivism rate was the ever-so-much hated child molester, at about 26%...exactly half that of the criminal population in general this study found.

Now, a counter question for you: if society is not allowed, under ANY circumstances to apply the death penalty, then how is society advanced in the case of John Allen Muhammed? I will reject, out of hand, the "jurors are untrustworthy" argument.

__________________
On the kinkometer, my kink measures as a sine wave.

In what countries is the death penalty considered a deterrent?



I couldn't find a single study that placed the recidivism rate for murderers anywhere near that high. In the next few days I should have more data on this particular point.



Possibly..but what's your point? California doesn't have the death penalty for child molesters, I don't think.


Umm..I'm not sure I understand your question, could you please clarify?

__________________
I want to know everything
I want to be everywhere
I want to fuck everyone in the world
I want to do something that matters

Belial,

My point is that different societies will have different notions of justice. Those different notions of justice will be realized in different laws. One example might be that of Capital Punishment. Indeed, I would be very surprised if the enormous range of human societies reduced to a single point of view on this or any subject.

On weakness in the anti-death penalty argument is that it will accept the death penalty only if is there is no possible chance of failure. As there exists no example of any work of human hands being 100%, then one might question why that should be expected of the Justice System.

__________________
Eudaimonia

It's not, but not because of the application of the death penalty. This was my point. The lack of deterrent effect comes from the horrible delay between the conviction and execution of the sentence. This was my point.



I picked child molesters as an example because of their low rate of recidivism. Part of your line of argument is that a low recidivism rate is a justification for a sentence of relative leniency (imprisonment vs death). When one examines case after case, though one finds the opposite is true of child molesters...often they are considered "sick" in the criminal justice sense. Therefore, they are institutionalized until they are "cured". But the argument is often advanced that "child molesters dont' get better", thereby becoming a justification for lifelong imprisonment. In the cases where the child molester is not considered sick (again, in the criminal justice sense), typically a very long sentence is handed out, then the perpetrator is hounded, harrassed and stalked after his release.

The ultimate point here is that "justice", whatever that actually is, is entirely political.

That being the case, we need to recognize that our argument is actually one of politics. It is part of my politics to allow the death penalty in some cases. And further, I think it is entirely appropriate in this particular criminal case.



John Allen Muhammad is a convicted serial murder, terrorist, and general slimy dude. His actions have made existence among the population, even though that may be confined to the criminal population, harmful to society. How is society advanced by his continued presence among the living?

__________________
On the kinkometer, my kink measures as a sine wave.

I generally don't like the death penalty, but for some really horrible crimes like those shootings ... I'll go for it.