People should suffer for their wrong doings and justice is the vehicle that carries the penalty suitable for the crime. Each criminal should get what their crime deserves and in the case of a murderer what their crime deserves is death, or is it. Most would agree, people who commit crimes, deserve to be punished in proportion to the enormity of their crime, so what should it be in the case of murder?
What comes to mind is "an eye for an eye", but this is often misquoted. The meaning of this is to express "equivalency", leaving it up to the Court to determine that the guilty should be punished neither too leniently or too severely. It's difficult to determine to what extent this Old Testament phrase was, or if at all, strictly enforced. In the case of murder, there was no doubt, the life of the murderer was taken— life for life (Num. 35:31).
Some may argue that capital punishment is morally wrong and to punish by death is the same as the crime itself and to languish in prison for the term of his/her natural life is a fair and fitting punishment enough. I am certain The Butcher of Rostov would have agreed with this.
Most would agree, people who commit crimes, deserve to be punished in proportion to the enormity of their crime, so what should it be in the case of murder?
Now imagine that one day the police comes to your home to inform you that your child killed someone. Yesterday everything was fine, but suddenly there is a chance that you'll never see you child again. You've just discovered that you didn't know something about your child.
How would you react?
What kind of attitude would you expect from those who are supposed to "punish" your child?
Here's something what I've learned from Satyr: the sum of all past nurturing
what makes me think: - every case is different - be ethical - don't kill - understand the human; he/she is fucked up for a reason - find a solution, but don't expect anyone to do what you wouldn't do by yourself
In my opinion: No death penalty; even for notorious killers. We only kill when they attack us.
Catch them, investigate, find a solution, but don't hurt.
Here's my version of Philip Larkin's 'This Be The Verse':
They fuck you up, your mum and dad. They may not mean to, but they do. They fill you with the faults they had And add some extra, just for you.
But they were fucked up in their turn By fools in old-style hats and coats, Who half the time were soppy-stern And half at one another’s throats.
Man hands on misery to man. It deepens like a coastal shelf. Wise up as early as you can, And don’t fuck up any kid by yourself.
Last edited by Thirsty on Tue Jan 21, 2014 11:36 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : spelling)
What is good or bad depends on the set of the values accepted in the society. We live in one society the other people live in other. Every society kills, murders and commits the acts of violence - on the human beings or animals. But some societies recognize that and embed the death, killing and violence in their sacred concepts. The other societies, making just the same or worse hypocritically, deny that, appealing to non-violence, tolerance and promoting peace via murder and war. So I don't judge the violence in itself that depends on the culture - some cultures sacralize it some not - but each human group commits the same acts - kill, torture and eat. So I have only pointed out that it is the fact. The peoples who do it consciously are more civilized and cultivated, more honest and spiritually developed, less infantile and more grown up than those who commit the same act without noticing it or denying its cannibal nature. The world is build on the act of killing (and eating) - God - Man - beast. That is the sense of priesthood. The priest is primordial killer. So existence is painful. We must accept it as it is. We cause pain, we feel pain. It is quite normal situation. The cannibalism is not "disgusting exception" and "horrible sign of moral depravity". In some way it is natural. Indian tradition affirms that "kshatryas eat vaishyas". Vedic hymns are full of the eating (killing, devouring) metaphors. I only try to stress that we are responsible of what we eat, of whom we kill and destroy. The african and oceanian tribes give us example that I find beautiful and pure.
It all depends on the type of society as long as they are honest about it. For me it's a matter of net effect; if the criminal has a minimal potential of benefiting society in the future then execution is appropriate, whatever utility the taxes finance must have an appropriate return on investment. Likewise parents should be given the option of exterminating mentally impaired offspring. Ego, superstition, and selfishness all culprits in perpetuating lives not worth living.
if the criminal has a minimal potential of benefiting society in the future then execution is appropriate, whatever utility the taxes finance must have an appropriate return on investment.
What if the criminal says: "OK, I made a mistake. Use my body to experiment and test new drugs, but don't kill me."
Would that benefit the society more than just killing him?
reasonvemotion
Gender : Posts : 681 Join date : 2013-01-09 Location : The Female Spirit
A relationship which is tempestuous and violent, might suggest the wife be considered a victim of "battered wife" syndrome. It is fair to suggest she was driven to murder, because of "diminished responsibility" and be spared the death penalty.
Whereas, the rape of an under age child, or a particularly heinous rape and attack on a person, surely warrants the death penalty.
There are crimes that are more deserving of the death penalty than a killing.
Anfang
Gender : Posts : 3989 Join date : 2013-01-23 Age : 40 Location : Castra Alpine Grug
Irish Law discernes two kinds of rape, forcor and sleth, even though for both the same penalties apply. Forcor hereby refers to forible rape, while sleth covers all kinds of situations where a woman is subjected to intercourse without her consent. Whatever the kind of rape was, the rapist must pay the honour-price of the victim's superior (usually father, husband, son or guardian), and the full e/raic if the victim was a girl in marriageable age, a chief wife or a nun that has not renounced the veil, half that for any other kind of woman. If the victim becomes pregnant as a result of the rape, the rapist is fully responsible for rearing the child. However, there are some cases where rape incurs no penalty, whatever kind it may be. In most cases this applies where the woman raped was promiscuous or adulterous, such as prostitutes or a married woman that agrees to meet another man. However, if the woman conceals the rape, there is also no penalty for it. If the rape happens in a town or settlement, the woman is obliged to call for help, but not so if the assault is made in the wilderness.
Sounds quite reasonable to me. What's also interesting, is, that they aren't concerned about re-integrating every member into society. One of their highest penalties is basically becoming an outcast. And if you are an outcast then you are from there on, outside the law.
reasonvemotion
Gender : Posts : 681 Join date : 2013-01-09 Location : The Female Spirit
If the victim becomes pregnant as a result of the rape, the rapist is fully responsible for rearing the child.
This seems like a deplorable indifference to the plight of rape victims who find themselves carrying their attackers’ child. From what you state there is/was no provision for women who conceive in rape to have legal access to abortion.
I suppose one could argue from an evolutionary point of view, rape provides an opportunity for the rapist's genes to survive, this of course being regardless of whether the victim desires it or not. Basically, one would be inclined to think this is an extreme evolutionary payoff" method for anti-social behaviour, with all disregard to the relevancy of his the rapist's parental fitness.
What of gang rape. The leader is usually a strong sociopathic type, who has charisma and the ability to influence others, should it be the leader who is solely responsible for the punishment of these crimes, or only the father of a resultant child from the rapes, or are all equally guilty, all deserving the same punishment.
Quote :
From Celtic/old Irish Law
I am presuming it has been revised, to some degree, at least.
Anfang
Gender : Posts : 3989 Join date : 2013-01-23 Age : 40 Location : Castra Alpine Grug
Those laws were created for a specific time and place. A certain kind of organizing which developed in a certain environment. No modern medicine and a society which is more local and all villagers knowing each other more or less, I guess. Women were protected by their kin.
At that time abortion was probably a dangerous practice, I mean, for the health of the woman. But that law doesn't say that she has to keep it. To be fair, I think abortion was probably frowned upon at the time but that's just my guess, yet, I'm sure, 'accidents' and miscarriages happened at that time as well...
I think gang rape during peace times didn't happen often enough for someone to come up with a separate paragraph on it. I guess they all had to pay the price for the honor reparations and all together or one in particular had to pay for the child.
"Capital punishment has in the past been practiced in almost every society, although currently only 58 nations actively practice it, with 95 countries having abolished it. The four most populous countries in the world are the ones that apply the death penalty and they are The People's Republic of China, India, the United States of America and Indonesia".
Is not life without parole, a different kind of death penalty anyway? This "staying alive" also denies the possibility of redemption, just as much as strapping a murderer to the electric chair, or filling his veins with poison. I see no difference, except one is going to cost the nation on an ongoing basis, until he/she dies a natural death.
I would rather have the money invested in a project like "Save the Whales"," or Feed the Feral Dogs, instead of housing and feeding a killer, what good is he/she within society. If they are free they cost, if they are jailed they cost.............. and with my taxes.
I would rather have the money invested in a project like "Save the Whales"," or Feed the Feral Dogs, instead of housing and feeding a killer, what good is he/she within society. If they are free they cost, if they are jailed they cost.............. and with my taxes.
So, you'd rather save whales than humans?
Do you think whales don't kill humans?
reasonvemotion wrote:
It is all about money, so why not economize.
What is money? What is the first thing that pops in your head when you think about money? What picture do you imagine? Numbers on a piece of paper, or a credit card? Or all the shiny and beautiful things you would buy if you had a huge pile of money.
Why not economize? Well, it's unethical to pay somebody to kill others for you, only because you and the killer value money more than humans and the scientific research. When you have a disease and allow doctors to experiment on your body, you help them to understand humans much better, and to find solutions.
So, why would you kill anyone if we can benefit from the fact that he/she is already in jail and doesn't pose a threat anymore?
It's time for science, isn't it?
Just imagine that you and your family live on a farm, far from the nearest city. There is nobody else, no neighbours, nothing, only you and them. One day you find out that your son/daughter is a notorious rapist and a killer ~ a wolf in sheep's skin.
So, there is nobody you can pay to do the job for you. You're the judge and the executioner.
Would you give your son/daughter a lethal injection, watch him/her die and release body fluids, and then bury the body and clean all the mess by yourself?
Just imagine that you only have two choices: give him/her a lethal injection by yourself or call the police who will put him/her in jail, and there is no death penalty.
What would you do?
reasonvemotion
Gender : Posts : 681 Join date : 2013-01-09 Location : The Female Spirit
Just imagine that you only have two choices: give him/her a lethal injection by yourself
I could not, which is why we have people trained to do this. Just as a medical practitioner does not treat his own family, another physician is appointed to do so. "A personal, non-professional relationship can affect many aspects of medical care".
In America the total life sentenced population is approximately 141,000 people, twice the amount of the entire incarcerated population in Japan. Keeping so many older prisoners does not reduce the crime rate and is extremely expensive. The number of people age 55 or older in prisons grew by 77% and these elderly prisoners have a greater need for expensive health care services and prisons spend two or three times more on an elderly prisoner than a younger one, on average about $70,000 per year.
No longer run by the government, prisons are now privatized, which means big business, all charged to the government, which in turn is paid by the taxpayers.
Ivan Milat, the Australian serial killer, dubbed the Back Packer Killer, is costing the New South Wales taxpayers on average $301,000 per annum to keep this monster in Supermax containment.
"Today, the death penalty is entangled in a highly complex web of rules and procedures. Yet opponents of the death penalty complain that capital defendants are regularly denied due process and that capital punishment continues to be imposed in a capricious, arbitrary and discriminatory fashion. Meanwhile, supporters of capital punishment lament the lengthy, often unending legal appeals process in death penalty cases that in their view denies victims’ families the closure that a timely execution reportedly brings".
If it were my son/daughter, would I turn them in?
Yes.
Should I expect my child to go through life bearing the consequences of their actions?
"What is it that the correctional service actually corrects? In my view very little...and...the justice system is completely criminal and it should be studied..."
So begins a provocative presentation by trauma and addiction treatment expert, Gabor Maté, M.D. While working for two decades on Vancouver's Downtown East Side, Gabor saw how the purely medical model of addiction theory fails to take into account the effects of trauma and the biopsychosocial conditions of human beings as they live in relationship with others. He argues that current Canadian social and criminal policy exacerbate and entrench addiction, criminal behaviour and human suffering. He calls for social policy, medical training and criminal justice to become more fully aligned with the current science and understanding of addiction and healing."
reasonvemotion wrote:
In America the total life sentenced population is approximately 141,000 people, twice the amount of the entire incarcerated population in Japan. Keeping so many older prisoners does not reduce the crime rate and is extremely expensive.
Such will be America as the upbringing of their youth.
reasonvemotion
Gender : Posts : 681 Join date : 2013-01-09 Location : The Female Spirit
"What is it that the correctional service actually corrects? In my view very little...and...the justice system is completely criminal and it should be studied..."
as you have stated, pointless imprisonment.
So for the serial killer, "kill and boil", fair and just for all.
All this talk of rights / rehabilitation / law. Why the right to live to these evil individuals when they have mercilessly taken someone else's rights.
Tell me.
If it was your child, who was the victim of a serial killer, would you apply all of the above, go visit him, try to find out why, giving him the opportunity to "relive" it all over again.
"What is it that the correctional service actually corrects? In my view very little...and...the justice system is completely criminal and it should be studied..."
as you have stated, pointless imprisonment.
No, that's not what I have stated.
pointless imprisonment or maybe prenatal stress and pointless education system?
Quote :
Prenatal stress (or prenatal maternal stress) is exposure of an expectant mother to distress, which can be caused by stressful life events or by environmental hardships. The resulting changes to the mother's hormonal and immune system may harm the fetus's (and after birth, the infant's) immune function and brain development.
"First you have to understand that the source of addiction is in the human himself. Then you think: how do you help someone who is pain? First by acknowledging their suffering and validating their attempt to escape from their pain, then by helping them not suffer so that they don’t have to rely on the drugs. It takes a whole different perspective. Resources that are used to incarcerate people would have to be used to help people to rewire their brains in healthy ways—through access to food, safe housing, good counseling, and employment skills: those things addicts that don’t have and have no way of getting under the current system. At the very heart of addiction is the deep absence of self-esteem, which is caused by stress to the traumatized child. Addicts believe that if all these negative things happen to them, there must be something wrong with them. When they are punished and attacked and criticized further, it hardens that deep sense of self-loathing." Gabor Maté
