CT to repeal the death penalty
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:44:05 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  CT to repeal the death penalty
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7
Author Topic: CT to repeal the death penalty  (Read 21029 times)
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #125 on: April 26, 2012, 01:14:41 PM »

Wait vengeance is the primary purpose of the justice system? So we seek "vengeance" against people who drive too fast or illegally park?
I believe the primary purpose is deterrence- people get a ticket, others don't park illegally or speed. People get fried- others don't murder

That's part of the problem with the death penalty, I might actually decide not to park illegally or speed because I don't want to have to pay for the ticket, but almost no one is going to decide not to kill somebody just because they'll get lethal injection rather than life imprisonment, especially since the lethal injection is years and years off.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,081
Greece
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #126 on: April 26, 2012, 01:58:24 PM »

The problem with the death penalty not being a deterent is that's it not used often.  If I park downtown and I'm only going to get a ticket once every few thousand times I do it, I'll chance it and save a bundle.
Logged
Joe Republic
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,044
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #127 on: April 26, 2012, 02:19:56 PM »

The problem with the death penalty not being a deterent is that's it not used often.

Texas still has a well above average murder rate, despite being by far the most prolific enforcer of the death penalty.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,081
Greece
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #128 on: April 26, 2012, 02:27:47 PM »
« Edited: April 26, 2012, 02:33:50 PM by Grumps »

The problem with the death penalty not being a deterrent is that's it not used often.

Texas still has a well above average murder rate, despite being by far the most prolific enforcer of the death penalty.

Even they aren't prolific enough to make it a true deterrent.  Honestly, Joe, no one will use it enough to make it one.  I see it going away in nearly every state eventually.

Edit:  Joe - according to this site  http://www.txexecutions.org/reports.asp?year=2011  They had 13 in 2011.....hardly enough to be a deterrent.  But that's 13 more than most states so it's news.  I wouldn't call it prolific though.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #129 on: April 26, 2012, 04:51:52 PM »

What about the people already on Death Row?

They still get the axe.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #130 on: April 26, 2012, 04:54:51 PM »


So, they sentences are not commuted automatically? In most cases, when jurisdiction abolished the death penalty, sentences are commutted. In some cases, like in New Mexico, the death penalty is eliminated in all future cases, while those already sentenced are "grandfathered".
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #131 on: April 26, 2012, 04:55:58 PM »


So, they sentences are not commuted automatically? In most cases, when jurisdiction abolished the death penalty, sentences are commutted. In some cases, like in New Mexico, the death penalty is eliminated in all future cases, while those already sentenced are "grandfathered".

I too was surprised, but it is what I heard on the morning news. I won't be surprised if Malloy commutes them all, but that would be his responsibility, the law does not do that.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #132 on: April 26, 2012, 09:02:43 PM »


So, they sentences are not commuted automatically? In most cases, when jurisdiction abolished the death penalty, sentences are commutted. In some cases, like in New Mexico, the death penalty is eliminated in all future cases, while those already sentenced are "grandfathered".

I too was surprised, but it is what I heard on the morning news. I won't be surprised if Malloy commutes them all, but that would be his responsibility, the law does not do that.

Speaking of New Mexico example, it would be a sad irony to see three remaining death row inmates executed by the state, that abolished the death penalty.
Logged
Simfan34
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,744
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.90, S: 4.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #133 on: April 26, 2012, 09:05:32 PM »


So, they sentences are not commuted automatically? In most cases, when jurisdiction abolished the death penalty, sentences are commutted. In some cases, like in New Mexico, the death penalty is eliminated in all future cases, while those already sentenced are "grandfathered".

I too was surprised, but it is what I heard on the morning news. I won't be surprised if Malloy commutes them all, but that would be his responsibility, the law does not do that.

Speaking of New Mexico example, it would be a sad irony to see three remaining death row inmates executed by the state, that abolished the death penalty.

It would be a shame...
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #134 on: April 27, 2012, 12:37:14 AM »

Signed !

Smiley

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #135 on: April 27, 2012, 01:13:37 AM »

Good news and well said by Malloy.
Logged
Pingvin
Pingvin99
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,761
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #136 on: April 27, 2012, 02:08:34 AM »

Dammit!
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #137 on: April 27, 2012, 02:58:48 AM »

What a moderate hero douchebag.
Logged
AndrewTX
AndrewCT
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,091


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #138 on: April 27, 2012, 07:14:10 AM »

Yay! They can go back to work in the GA and raise taxes and force young people out of the state again!
Logged
Napoleon
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,892


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #139 on: April 27, 2012, 07:20:58 AM »
« Edited: April 27, 2012, 07:23:55 AM by Governor Napoleon »

Yay! They can go back to work in the GA and raise taxes and force young people out of the state again!

Ned Lamont would have put this state back on track.
I am glad we abolished the death penalty but Malloy shouldn't hide behind buzzwords, he should firmly dismiss an archaic form of punishment.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,236
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #140 on: April 27, 2012, 07:43:14 AM »

I guess I forgot to say yay

so yay Smiley
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #141 on: April 27, 2012, 08:43:39 AM »

Wait, are people here claiming that vengeance is not a valid foundation of the justice system? I would argue it is the only sensible (and, yes, rational foundation).

What else would be the purpose of the justice system?

Maintaining a civilized society where everybody is treated equally?

Seriously, this is one of the most reactionary posts I've ever read. And coming from Gustaf that says a lot.

Lol, what? That's not the specific purpose of the justice system. We have schools and hospitals to achieve that. Maintaining a civilized society is a rather vague concept as well.

To the others who answered with various remarks.

Justice is precisely what vengeance is about. Giving someone what they deserve.

Public mutilation would not be a logical consequence of retribution as the foundation for justice. Most people wouldn't consider it just retribution. If the purpose is to remove a threat to society we should obviously execute all criminals. That's the most efficient way of achieving that goal. Rehabilitation doesn't really work but besides that it's obviously not how we built our justice system. For starters, people who can't be rehabilitated shouldn't get any punishment at all if that's the foundation for the system.

BRTD as usual doesn't really get it. Vengeance is a bit of a loaded term, retribution is probably more apt. Parking tickets are arguably not really a key part of the justice system, it's more of a societal tool to deal with a specific problem. Still, to an extent sure. Most people want people to be punished for bad behaviour. That desire for vengeance is in my opinion the core of the justice system in most countries. That offends peoples' sensibilities quite a lot, apparently.

And saying that the justice system is to keep a law-abiding society seems a bit circular. That's essentially to say that the purpose of the justice system is to make people follow the justice system. That does nothing to explain the underlying principle of it.

But, anyway. What was the point of the Nuremberg trials in the opinion of Px, BRTD, Antonio and the rest of our most esteemed intellectuals on this site?
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #142 on: April 27, 2012, 04:16:27 PM »

@ Gustaf, isn't quite obvious in my post as to what I believe the underlying principle of a justice system is? The main goal is to ensure that criminal action that causes damage to life, erodes fairness etc is prevented. The rehabilitative goal of the criminal justice system exists for this reason and punitive aspect as well. I only believe in retributive justice as an intrinsically beneficial part of the system with regards to murder, assault and other exceptions. In this case, you're correct: vengeance would be a major goal and I am at times conflicted as to whether or not I should support the death penalty. I generally support what is least costly to the state yet still humane and fully litigated yet still punishes the criminal properly so generally that means I'm opposed.

I think we both misunderstood each other. Looking back on your post, I highly doubt that you believe that retribution is the main goal of the system with regards to the vast majority of crimes and I certainly don't want to eschew the idea of "vengeance" entirely from the system.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,965
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #143 on: April 27, 2012, 04:42:51 PM »

"Giving people what they deserve" isn't vengeance. Vengeance is "making people suffer like I suffered". It's something subjective and highly primitive. It's the idea that justice is something individualistic and particularist rather than universalist. It is, in short, reactionary.

There are three fundamental goals of a penal system. That is :

1. To create the bases for a social contract : to make people know that their rights will be respected and that those who infringe them will be punished, so that people are confident enough in their fellows to allow for the establishment of a well-functioning society.

2. To improve people : through punishment, one should ideally understand that what he has done is wrong, and thus strive to adopt a better behaviour ; thus to become a better person.

3. To prevent crimes : since people know they will be punished for their wrongdoings, they will have a significant disincentive.

Vengeance should absolutely never be one of them.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #144 on: April 28, 2012, 01:34:46 PM »

@ Gustaf, isn't quite obvious in my post as to what I believe the underlying principle of a justice system is? The main goal is to ensure that criminal action that causes damage to life, erodes fairness etc is prevented. The rehabilitative goal of the criminal justice system exists for this reason and punitive aspect as well. I only believe in retributive justice as an intrinsically beneficial part of the system with regards to murder, assault and other exceptions. In this case, you're correct: vengeance would be a major goal and I am at times conflicted as to whether or not I should support the death penalty. I generally support what is least costly to the state yet still humane and fully litigated yet still punishes the criminal properly so generally that means I'm opposed.

I think we both misunderstood each other. Looking back on your post, I highly doubt that you believe that retribution is the main goal of the system with regards to the vast majority of crimes and I certainly don't want to eschew the idea of "vengeance" entirely from the system.

If we're talking about crimes (and not say misdemeanors) I do think that retribution is the main   aspect.

Again, if we only had the justice system to prevent crime why not have the death penalty for everything? That would maximize deterrence would it not?

Also, to clear up potential confusion, being a retributivist does not necessarily mean favouring capital punishment. So that's not the point I'm making, in case someone thinks so.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #145 on: April 28, 2012, 01:39:22 PM »

"Giving people what they deserve" isn't vengeance. Vengeance is "making people suffer like I suffered". It's something subjective and highly primitive. It's the idea that justice is something individualistic and particularist rather than universalist. It is, in short, reactionary.

There are three fundamental goals of a penal system. That is :

1. To create the bases for a social contract : to make people know that their rights will be respected and that those who infringe them will be punished, so that people are confident enough in their fellows to allow for the establishment of a well-functioning society.

2. To improve people : through punishment, one should ideally understand that what he has done is wrong, and thus strive to adopt a better behaviour ; thus to become a better person.

3. To prevent crimes : since people know they will be punished for their wrongdoings, they will have a significant disincentive.

Vengeance should absolutely never be one of them.

Maybe you should back up your idea of this meaning with something. And also take note of the fact that I said vengeance might not be the best term and retribution might be less confusing. If one wikipedias "vengeance" one gets to revenge and the following paragraph:

"Revenge is a harmful action against a person or group in response to a grievance, be it real or perceived. It is also called payback, retribution, retaliation or vengeance; it may be characterized as a form of justice, an altruistic action which enforces societal rules and which is based on a deep rooted evolutionary instinct that helped humanity by implementing social cohesion in a subtle way."

Obviously reactionary nonsense right there!

Anyway, I assume given your stated criteria, that you consider it an outrage that we punished Goering and the other Nazi leaders after 1945? That did not improve them, it hardly prevented them nor any other politicians from doing it again and peoples' general confidence in strangers for societal interactions was hardly affected either.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,251


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #146 on: April 28, 2012, 09:03:04 PM »

Parking tickets are arguably not really a key part of the justice system, it's more of a societal tool to deal with a specific problem.

An argument can be made that 'a societal tool to deal with a specific problem' is not an inaccurate characterization of laws against things like murder.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #147 on: April 29, 2012, 03:07:28 AM »

Parking tickets are arguably not really a key part of the justice system, it's more of a societal tool to deal with a specific problem.

An argument can be made that 'a societal tool to deal with a specific problem' is not an inaccurate characterization of laws against things like murder.

Sure, but would you actually make that argument? When someone gets a parking ticket, do we nod approvingly to each other and say "justice has been served"?

In a society without cars there would be no parking tickets so it's perfectly possible to imagine a justice system without them that would still be just. That's sort of why I don't consider it a fundamental part of the system.

Parking tickets is a technical solution to the problem of cars being in the way that could theoretically be dealt with in different ways. I don't think most people or justice systems take the same view of murders.

Anyway, it's a bit of a side issue, in my opinion.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,251


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #148 on: April 29, 2012, 03:28:57 AM »

Parking tickets are arguably not really a key part of the justice system, it's more of a societal tool to deal with a specific problem.

An argument can be made that 'a societal tool to deal with a specific problem' is not an inaccurate characterization of laws against things like murder.

Sure, but would you actually make that argument? When someone gets a parking ticket, do we nod approvingly to each other and say "justice has been served"?

No, and you're right that it's a different sort of issue, but that shouldn't be our reaction to killings, either.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #149 on: April 29, 2012, 03:57:26 AM »

Parking tickets are arguably not really a key part of the justice system, it's more of a societal tool to deal with a specific problem.

An argument can be made that 'a societal tool to deal with a specific problem' is not an inaccurate characterization of laws against things like murder.

Sure, but would you actually make that argument? When someone gets a parking ticket, do we nod approvingly to each other and say "justice has been served"?

No, and you're right that it's a different sort of issue, but that shouldn't be our reaction to killings, either.

To killings? I meant when we arrest someone for murder and gives them whatever punishment has been established (like a prison sentence for example).

Again, I'm not making a case for the death penalty here.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 12 queries.