h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I take it you didn't read any of the backlog HT?

I recommend Boxing Baboon's postings from 135 - 200.

Most of the more common arguments for and against death penalty get thrashed about during there.

As for your statement that half the population of evil child molestors were shot or gassed, I'll be honest, I don't find it particularly credible. But you know we would like to still hear from you, so perhaps do some background research and if you still hold your opinion to be true come back with some justifications for it and we can debate those then.

Clive.

P.S my post from post 325 is the *actual* subject of this forum in case it gets lost sight of again.

Most of the pro-death penalty people seem to have rather less reasoned arguments than the anti-death penalty people.

I think it's because the pro-death argument is an emotional response. I used to think that way too, but upon reflection & thought (and believe it or not, this thread too), I now feel that death is a quick & easy way out. I support real life sentences with no frills or amenities. I believe this is a much harsher punishment, satisfying the need for vengeance and safeguarding society.

Hello
Theres cases where its pretty obvious the murderer is guilty.I have never suggested killing every person thats involved in a loss of someones life.Each case should be looked into quite Thoroughly.
I just have a belief that the death penalty should be a part of the law.
I cant get away from the facts someone dies and the killer is allowed to live.Every person on this planet as to deal with people dieng by natural causes at some time or another.
Nobody expects to be shot by a looney gunman or have a child kidnapped by a maniac,abused then killed.
Im if certain people in this thread dont agree with me.But these people should be put to sleep.

BB,

I agree with what you're saying, in part. I don't think that "pretty obvious" is a high enough standard for imposing a death penalth, though. Refer to my post #253...

"A person is guilty of some horrible crime, beyond all possible doubt. Forensic evidence, dozens of eye witnesses and a signed confession all point the finger. This same person is not only without remorse, but proud of the deed, having stated that, given the opportunity, there would be as many repeat performances as possible."

Guilt beyond all possible doubt and utter lack of remorse would, I think, be an appropriate standard for the imposition of the death penalty.

Anything less, and innocents will be executed.

NBY

>>Guilt beyond all possible doubt and utter lack of remorse <<

Raises for me an interesting question. If you were innocent, but everyone thought you were guilty, indeed you'd be convicted of the crime and multiple appeals had failed - and you didn't show any remorse, none at all, because you were innocent. Wouldn't that just condemn you further? If the death penalty were an option you might go to your death never showing any shred of remorse.

That would be a grave injustice unless guilt beyond all reasonable doubt doesn't ever preclude the sytem admitting it can still get it wrong.

I don't have any examples to say this has ever been the case but I suspect it is possibly more likely than the exclusive case of absolute proof you suggest NBY because how often is that combination of proofs ever the case? (rhetorical question)

That depends on how often you watch CSI, I think.

Non-rhetorical answer:

Guilt beyond all possible doubt is incredibly rare. That, combined with utter lack of remorse is even more so. So, in that scenario, decades could pass without the death penalty coming into play.

If the standard for a conviction is "beyond all reasonable doubt," but the standard for imposing a death penalty is "beyond all possible doubt in combination with lack of remorse," then the remorse-free person you describe is imprisoned, not executed. The "all possible doubt" standard has not been met.

Even in the recent case where someone had live internet broadcasts of himself sexually abusing young children, either the lack of a signed confession or the presence of some show of remorse would negate the consideration of the death penalty.

If the imposition of a death penalty is possible, it should be only considered for the most extreme circumstances and reserved for the one or two persons per generation (one would hope) who well and truly have forfeited their right to live.

NBY

Not banned yet

I agree with you there only with the execute part though.

NBY,
I'm still a little confused about your criteria, since it would seem that anyone would be able to escape punishment apart from those people who actually wished to be killed if they are convicted, (and/or those not of sound mind).
It wouldn't seem likely to have any deterrent value, and even the revenge aspect might be limited if the only people exectued were those who implicity opted for execution.

What do you do if someone claims to be remorseful, but you really don't believe them - is execution going to depend on how *convincing* someone sounds?
What if they later on say 'I'm glad I did it'?
How credible is remorse really going to be in the context of a situation where many people would feel a huge incentive to *pretend* remorse even if they didn't feel it - would it really make people who cared about the victim feel better if they thought that a killer had escaped execution by pretending to feel sorry?
When it comes to truly cold-blooded killers, wouldn't we end up executing people effectively for being honest?

Potholer,

It's not precisely accurate to say that anyone who did not actually wish to be killed, rather than spending decades in a cage, or those who are, possibly, not of sound mind, would escape punishment. They'd escape execution.

One of the primary arguments against the death penaltyis that it's "barbaric" and unacceptable for any truly "civilized" society. Yet every few years we seem to hear about a person being killed by the police after making it clear that s/he would rather die than be captured and imprisoned.

Torture is subjective, to some extent. There are people form whom imprisonment equates to torture. Is the death penalty any kind of deterrent? It doesn't appear to be. Is it a form of revenge? Possibly, but that isn't a very good reason for its application - Execution as revenge is one of the strongest arguments I can think of against state-sponsored execution, and really is an act of barbarism, in my opinion.

So, you're absolutely right is your summary of who would end up being executed. It would only be those individual who either would rather die than spend the rest of their lives in prison or whose sociopathy is so extreme that they just don't care what society thinks of them.

If a person would rather die than live in a cage forever, and those are the only choices, which is more barbaric? Mandating a life of (for that person) torture, of granting him or her that wish?

NBY

I'm not sure remorse is a valid reason for sympathy in all cases. Very often people are only sorry when they're caught.

In the recent murder of Mary-Anne Leneghan, one of her killers had been previously arrested for kidnapping a 14 year old boy, hanging him upside down, stuffing his mouth with paper, and beating him so badly he suffered brain damage. At the time he was 15, the judge said he shouldn't be identified, so he could have a chance to repent and recover. He was sentanced to 3 years, and served 6 months.

This was abuse of a child, by a child - 4 years later he went on to kidnap, rape, and murder - he pleaded guilty.

Whilst psychiatry remains less than a science, I think that freeing brutal murderers carries an unacceptably high risk. I feel this relates even more in the case of child molesters. Whilst a 'real' life sentence would prevent this re-occurance, I still find it difficult to understand why these people should be a drain on society for years to come.

Point taken about 'punishment', but I hope you knew what I meant.

>>"... Yet every few years we seem to hear about a person being killed by the police after making it clear that s/he would rather die than be captured and imprisoned."

Not exactly - the police don't execute people on request of the person they [should] only kill someone who is a threat to them or other people, effectively killing in self-defence. If someone shouted to the police and said "I'm not going to prison - I have a blancmange and I'm not afraid to use it" they'd seem less likely to get shot than someone waving a gun around, however they felt about imprisonment in the heat of the moment.
Self-defence is a case of the lesser of two evils - "If it seems that someone is probably going to be killed, who would we rather it was?" That isn't the case in execution.

>>"If a person would rather die than live in a cage forever, and those are the only choices, which is more barbaric? Mandating a life of (for that person) torture, of granting him or her that wish?"

Well, *personally* I wouldn't go to extreme lengths to prevent convicted killers killing themselves. If someone really wants to die, and feels that way for a sustained period of time rather than brief spells of despair, they will probably find a way.
If execution was effectively a state-assisted suicide for people unable to deal with prison, a fair number of the "hang-em and flog'em" crowd who normally seem keen on executions would propbably see it as someone taking a coward's way out and so not be satisfied from the revenge aspect.

Bit of catching up to do here, Azahar in post 352 said "I'm even not sure if all people who sexually abuse children could truly be called paedophiles. As in those who constantly seek out children in this manner are possibly different from those who 'behave badly' given a certain time and place situation - it might not be something they look for particularly." I have read some stuff about this, that there are different types of people who sexually abuse children and not of them actually sexually desire children. I couldn't find out any detail on it though.

As for SWL comments about not being able to find any female child molesters when he was a teenager! I guess that is an equivilent to the rape fantasy, when its fantasy and you are in control its fine, but no-one would want it to happen in reality.

As for comments about the death penalty, I don't want to see it. On an emotional and personal note, I don't want to lose my Dad even though he was my abuser. Others have the right to think about their abusers differently, of course.

On another unrelated note, it turns out I was having a breakdown last week. This has resulted in me finally being treated for depression only after 16 years of asking for help. I am now on anti-depressants and so am unlikely to have another breakdown like last weeks. Just thought all those who saw it in action, maybe interested to know, oh and I am so not looking for sympathy, just hoping to clear up any awkwardness here.

Kaz, my comment was crass and stupid and I apologise. I was actually thinking of how difficult I found it geting laid in my teens and the idea of a willing woman appealed

I'm glad to hear you're getting help.

SWL I found your comment interesting, obviously if that situation had happened, it would have been because you wanted it (I am assuming), not because if was forced upon you.

I always found it interesting to hear of tribes where children were initiated into sex by aunts and uncles. Now I will probably find out there is no actual evidence of it happening! But until I hear that for sure, in some ways it sounds ideal, you would initiated into something which many of us as kids were useless at. Imagine a place where people had some confidence, skill and knowledge. I may just be falling into the trap of fantasising myself, but as a teenager if the lad knew how womens bodies worked and vice versa, think how much better your first experiences with peers would be.

However in our society this initiation would be viewed as child sexual abuse.

BTW 'child sexual abuse' and 'child support agency' - same acronym - very unfortunate.

<> (Kaz)

Well, yes it would and rightly so. I don't find this strange at all since we are not living in the sort of society that accepts this sort of behaviour.

In a sense, it doesn't matter how much proof anyone can find about 'backward tribes' living in 'Timbuktu' or wherever that condone this sort of thing - the fact remains that in the societies all of us here on h2g2 live in the law clearly states that this behaviour is illegal. Full stop.

<>

I think that is rather overdoing it. Looking for potentially insulting connections where none actually exist.


az

"I think that is rather overdoing it. Looking for potentially insulting connections where none actually exist."

Its not insulting, its actually quite funny. I used to work for the child support agency, I hated it. They were more interested in their xmas party and section decorations than their work. It was the time when there were well-publicised suicides by people who were trying to deal with the CSA. So its apt and more than that, I was trying to point out the irony.

Interesting that the 9/11 plotter is to face the death penalty.

Where do such crimes fit in the debate?

Potholer:

>>>>"... Yet every few years we seem to hear about a person being killed by the police after making it clear that s/he would rather die than be captured and imprisoned."

>>"Not exactly - the police don't execute people on request of the person they [should] only kill someone who is a threat to them or other people, effectively killing in self-defence."

I think my figure of every few years is probably pretty accurate, at least for the United States. I seem to read of someone attempring, and failing at, suicide by cop, every few DAYS.

>>"If execution was effectively a state-assisted suicide for people unable to deal with prison, a fair number of the "hang-em and flog'em" crowd who normally seem keen on executions would propbably see it as someone taking a coward's way out and so not be satisfied from the revenge aspect."

You're probably right. The next question is "How much attention should be paid to the 'hang-em and flog-em' crowd?"

SWL:

I have to admit that I haven't been paying enough attention to that trial to know if all of the criteria I spelled out for my own personal fantasy regarding the death penalty have been met. There's another interesting factor at play here, too. Life impriisonment makes him... a prisoner. Execution makes him, potentially, a martyr. I also suspect that, even based on his own twisted version of Islam, suicide, without the ability to take out people he doesn't like in the process, is not an option.

NBY