Aurora shootings: an open discussion on the death penalty.

[69]

Expand Quote

THIS MAN IS A MK ULTRA VITCIM, HE DOESNT DESERVE THIS SHIT HE WAS PROGRAMMED TO KILL AND HE WASNT THE ONLY ONE SHOOTING I CANT BELIEVE NO ONE HAS BOUGHT THIS UPP YET??  YOU PEOPLE ARE COMPLETELY FUCKING BLIND AND WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING THE GOVERMENT TELLS/MISINFORMS YOU ON

[close]

Jews did 911?

Jerry: And then he asked the assistant for a schtickle of flouride!

Elaine: Why are you so concerned about this?

Jerry: I'll tell you why. Because I believe Whatley converted to Judaism just for the jokes! (Phone rings)

[weedpop]

Expand Quote

So the purposeful activity of scratching the itch on my ass is the same a someone's purposeful activity of studying to cure cancer? Since no one died doing either one that means that they have the same outcome and impact on society by your logic.

[close]

If justice is more valuable than buildings, and justice is served by the death penalty (some people deserve it), then innocent people dying from the death penalty should be more acceptable than innocent people dying construction - since something more valuable is served by the death penalty than construction.

Since many people think it's the opposite - they're more concerned about the death of innocent people due to the death penalty than contruction - many people have their values skewed; they care more about building than justice.

I'm not big on retributive justice so no 'deserts' for me thanks. In my opinion buildings are more valuable to society than some vague, illusory concept of biblical 'justice'. We've already established that the death penalty doesn't deter and is less cost effective than life imprisonment so...yeah.

Then again, I also think that the US should do away with it's system of elected judges and citizen juries in favour of a professional system similar to that which exists in countries like France. In my opinion the way things are done now isn't conducive to competent, non-biased evaluation of evidence and tends more towards institutionalized vigilantism, especially in high-profile cases.

The one thing I think we can all agree on is that all our justice systems could use a bit more sarlacc pit.

[4LOM]

buildings are more valuable to society than some vague, illusory concept of biblical 'justice'

If you think that some transactions or social, political, or economic systems are more just, fair, or warranted than others, you don’t rely on the bible, and there are relevant objective facts that can guide better/worse ways of identifying these just transactions or systems, then an understanding of justice that is non-biblical, precise, and grounded is possible.   

the way things are done now . . . tends more towards institutionalized vigilantism, especially in high-profile cases.

I wish this was true; Charles Bronson killing Casey Anthony is better than her just going bankrupt.

justice systems could use a bit more sarlacc pit

middle of nowhere, takes forever to get there, surrounded by Jabba's sleep on the floor lackeys, and all you get to see are idiots falling into the desert's butthole. No thanks.

Geonosian executions are fun justice

[landCow]

Expand Quote

THIS MAN IS A MK ULTRA VITCIM, HE DOESNT DESERVE THIS SHIT HE WAS PROGRAMMED TO KILL AND HE WASNT THE ONLY ONE SHOOTING I CANT BELIEVE NO ONE HAS BOUGHT THIS UPP YET?  YOU PEOPLE ARE COMPLETELY FUCKING BLIND AND WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING THE GOVERMENT TELLS/MISINFORMS YOU ON

[close]

Jews did 911?

every single tragedy, shooting, bombing and mass killing ever performed has been part of a giant conspiracy according to the internet. apparently not a single one is legit. amazing!

[Beer Keg Peg Leg]

i'm always amazed when people say that the death penalty is pointless or accomplishes nothing. you like to think that the lack of focus on the victims is a systemic thing and that normal people wouldn't think that way. if you were talking to a victim (family member in these kinds of cases) would you really casually dismiss the death penalty as pointless and of no value the way you've done it in this thread? that shit just seems so cold to me. you could at least acknowledge that it might have value for victims who've had horrible things done to their loved ones by these kinds of assholes.

for me it's real simple. how would i feel if i was in the victims shoes. if someone did something horrible to my family i'd want to kill them myself but you can't. however it's nice to know that the system won't take that away from you and that theirs hope that those fuckers will get theirs.

that said, i agree with the sentiments about "not with on circumstantial evidence" and all that. you need to be really sure you have the right guy but in those cases fuck them. solitaries a bitch but doing that last walk seems pretty bad too.

it always amazed when i read one of your posts and it's just as regular as the last one

[Sleazy]

there's simply no recovery from jr high insults

touché man, touché...

[nino brown]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

THIS MAN IS A MK ULTRA VITCIM, HE DOESNT DESERVE THIS SHIT HE WAS PROGRAMMED TO KILL AND HE WASNT THE ONLY ONE SHOOTING I CANT BELIEVE NO ONE HAS BOUGHT THIS UPP YET?  YOU PEOPLE ARE COMPLETELY FUCKING BLIND AND WILL FALL FOR ANYTHING THE GOVERMENT TELLS/MISINFORMS YOU ON

[close]

Jews did 911?

[close]

every single tragedy, shooting, bombing and mass killing ever performed has been part of a giant conspiracy according to the internet. apparently not a single one is legit. amazing!

NOT MUCH OF A CONSPIRACY WHEN THERES FACTS INVOLVED. DONT BE DUMB

[landCow]

well i guess if there is a youtube video the facts must be 100% correct and in no way skewed, misrepresented or grasping at straws. I concede.

[iLuhTahGOLF]

found this floating 'round the web

[nino brown]

well i guess if there is a youtube video the facts must be 100% correct and in no way skewed, misrepresented or grasping at straws. I concede.

JACKASSES LIKE YOU ARE THE REASON I HAVE NO HOPE IN SOCIETY.

THE GOVERNMENT CAN DO NO WRONG.

[KOOL MIKE]

they got you fooled nino brown, they got you fooled

[ROCKxADIO420]

Expand Quote

well to be fair, the sarlacc did take out some people, though they were not the intended victims

[close]

A perfect example of the fallibility of capital punishment!

o fuck!

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

The question also comes down to "What is the purpose of justice?" Do we have a justice system to put revenge in the hands of our government, or do we have a justice system that is designed to limit crime and keep us safe? Or is it somewhere in between?
People keep saying "put yourself in the shoes of the victim's family, and what they want," but since when has that ever been a concern of the government to comfort victims of crime? I don't think I've ever heard of the government picking up the medical bills of a shooting victim, or providing counseling to victims of abuse.
Also, does the death penalty really provide closure for the families of victims? Death penalty cases last years and even decades, that's years and decades of following and focusing on a tragic moment in your life, rather than coping and moving forward. Life sentences are given and that's that. They lock them up, throw away the key, and they don't have trial after trial replaying the emotional events that have unfolded. On top of that, there is no real evidence that the death penalty even provides the expected catharsis after years of intense focus on the tragedy.
I think it would be a better use to spend that money on victim counseling for the families and just avoid the flawed, expensive, and non-deterring method of punishment.

[KOOL MIKE]

The question also comes down to "What is the purpose of justice?" Do we have a justice system to put revenge in the hands of our government, or do we have a justice system that is designed to limit crime and keep us safe? Or is it somewhere in between?
People keep saying "put yourself in the shoes of the victim's family, and what they want," but since when has that ever been a concern of the government to comfort victims of crime? I don't think I've ever heard of the government picking up the medical bills of a shooting victim, or providing counseling to victims of abuse.
Also, does the death penalty really provide closure for the families of victims? Death penalty cases last years and even decades, that's years and decades of following and focusing on a tragic moment in your life, rather than coping and moving forward. Life sentences are given and that's that. They lock them up, throw away the key, and they don't have trial after trial replaying the emotional events that have unfolded. On top of that, there is no real evidence that the death penalty even provides the expected catharsis after years of intense focus on the tragedy.
I think it would be a better use to spend that money on victim counseling for the families and just avoid the flawed, expensive, and non-deterring method of punishment.

AGREED, give the families some cash and just let poor old james go, he has no doubt learned his lesson by now.

[Jackburton]

The world is pretty fucking irrational.  They want to ban high cap mags and ar, even though more people would have been killed in this case if Holmes could not have gotten his hands on such items.  For one the ar 15 jams when fired continuously for 50-60 plus rounds.  The oil burns off the bolt and it sticks.  Those large mags are also known to jam, which is why they failed military tests and are not used by our armed forces.  So if he had used regular mags more people would have been killed.  Also, the legislation has caused more guns to be sold in months than in years.  Realistically speaking gun bans in the U.S. will probably get overturned eventually, and the red states will never ban ar 15s.  It just will not happen, meaning this frenzy has put more guns on the streets, because people can drive from state to state.

Lets say there was a ban.  Then Holmes would have used bombs, which are more efficient.  He had enough explosives in his apartment to level a city block.  As crazy as it sounds in this particular case the large cap mag and ar 15 saved lives.  It could have been much, much worse considering how smart he was.  Of course in other situations people are not as smart and assault rifles give them an easy way to kill people.  Although I would assume Lanza was pretty smart too and could have built some bombs in.  I mean those are the two big cases that caused the frenzy.  Anyways, Lanza could have built some pipe bombs or other IED and went around throwing them in classrooms.  Again, it would take more planning than grabbing his moms ar 15 and just pulling the trigger.  I still find it ironic though.

I guess I am off topic here, but the death penalty is also pretty ironic.  The most humane way to kill somebody is to sever the nerves in the back of the head, above the part where the spine attaches to the skull.  It is basically instant lights out with no pain at all.  However there have been studies that have shown even a lethal injection that is actually carried out correctly could cause serious agony, because the person is paralyzed and there is no way to really know if they are unconscious.  It is something along those lines.  Basically it is flawed even if it carried out correctly, which is not always the case, meaning some convicts probably suffer quite a bit.  A large bolt gun or even shotgun loaded with slugs would get the job done every time, although it might be a little messy.

Intuitively the death penalty would seem to create a deterrent.  Proving deterrents is pretty much impossible, because no two countries are alike.  That is my opinion.  Even so there is the fact that the range of false convicts in general is like 10-15%.  It just seems wrong to kill so many innocent people.  I have always thought that maybe a stricter judicial process should be used in cases involving capital offenses, but that is also flawed.  It would open the door to a lot of issues.  Even though taking a persons life is as serious as it comes, I lean towards the death penalty.  At the end of the day I think strict laws and serious punishment are very useful.  People always talk about how they actually do not work, but I doubt such arguments. 

Again, it comes back to intuition and who I am.  I just believe in old testament and being strict.  Perhaps is just that I have been treated unfairly in my life and I am somewhat cold and vengeful.  I can honestly say that if I knew 100% that Holmes did it then he should be shot in the back of the head with a large caliber weapon.  That much I know.  Realistically I think we should study him for 6 months and then have him die by lethal injection, even if it is flawed. That won't happen either, so let him rot years and then kill him.

Also, as usual the gipper is fucking regular.  Obviously he has never taken a criminal justice course or maybe he did and he was too busy being a little faggot and didn't pay attention.  Punishment is based on deterrence, incapacitation, restitution, retribution and rehabilitation.  Also, how can you even say that the government does not attempt to comfort victims.  They award victims money and actually do provide counseling.  I mean are you really serious with this bullshit or are you putting us on.  Also, you really think that a life sentence is granted and then thats that.  You always try to come across as this learned person, but it's pretty clear that you are just a liberal douchebag. 

[Jackburton]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

It's like saying, "Imprisoning someone because they imprisoned someone when its illegal to imprison someone make no sense." But most wouldn't make that argument. Locke made a simple way around this: by having a death penalty, we are stating that life is so sacred that the only crime worthy of losing one's life is killing other people. ?�Locke made this argument. ?�By infringing on an individual's right to live, one has forfeited his right to live.

[close]

I think his point is the paradox of punishment - we ought to do (kill) what we ought not to do (kill).
The difference is that the wrongdoer deserves it, the victim did not.


And if a right is inalienable (is that in Locke?) then how can it be forfeited?

Expand Quote

Psychopaths can't feel empathy or sympathy for other people, so I wonder how many (mass) murders or sadistic killers will sit in their cell or in isolation and actually regret their actions. ?�If they're mentally or have been socialized to be incapable of recognizing other people's emotions and comprehending the true extent/nature of their actions, they basically get put in a cell and feel bad they go caught.

[close]

Are such people morally responsible for their actions?

Empathy/sympathy seems to be a part of being a moral agent.
So, if you don't have it, you're not a moral agent.
If you're not a moral agent, you're not morally responsible for your actions.
If you're not morally responible, you can't be justly punished.

So, we can't justly punish people that lack sympathy.

[close]

Mind=blown.

Yet, there isn't really difinitive proof that these people cannot feel any emotion.  Brain scans promote the idea that their neurocircuits for emotions do not respond correctly to stimuli, but these test are not full proof.  Moreover, these antisocial behavorial people can and do feel pain and empathy for themselves if something bad happens to them.  Therefore, they are capable of feeling something; that being, something for themselves.  They are also extremely elusive in there motives and can manipulate people on a whim.  Thus, saying they cannot feel emotion can be a ploy to better themselves.  It is a tricky subject.

Nonetheless, I like your point, but I still think these people should be held accountable for their own actions.  Just because they "can't feel" how they are hurting others does not give them the right to hurt others.  

Great thread btw.

[close]

Replying on my phone so I can't edit responses easily, but the moral agent argument isn't that strong. It presumes that laws prohibiting murder are based only on an emotive/empathetic basis when they are not. There are logical arguments against murder, so even if one can't empathize with other people and understand that they are harming a feeling human being, they could understand the social costs of murder (at least theoretically).

As for Locke and life as an inalienable right, "inalienable" for him means that it cannot be deprived of a person from birth or unjustly. It can, however, be stripped away from a person if the individual does not respect that right in another person. If you deprive a person of their right to life, you have forfeited your access to it.

Your comparison of construction accidents and the death penalty is flawed because you presume that the cost of an innocent life can be equated between the two. If we view the death penalty as killing a guilty party for justice against the unjust killing of an innocent party, when the death penalty kills an innocent individual, it is committing the exact crime it is attempting to correct/deter. If, as a society, we frown upon innocents being killed and wish to create systems to correct this, once we kill an innocent (via capital punishment), we must create a system to handle this risk.

Basically, we cannot accept the risk of an innocent person dying when they die in a process dedicated to preventing or providing retribution for their unnecessary death. Construction is not designed to deter murder. it's a false equivalency.

The point of construction is to provide a safe place for people and deter people from dying.  The analogy is based on the greater good or utilitarianism.  You see if we are a bunch of whiny pussy's then everyone can be a good person, even if the world is in chaos.  OR we can have some balls, get things accomplished, and create some type of hypocritical order.  At least this hypocrisy will not apply to our children, until they get older of course.  You guys just don't watch enough movies or television.  Its all there.  From the classics, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle,  to Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, then to Nietzsche to Satre.  Instead of reading about this crap, all you need to do is watch TV.  Learn excel, software design, acquisition, and implementation methodologies, and how ERP systems create value.  Basically let your ethical inhibitions burn out, throw away the philosophy books, and get with the program.

[chockfullofthat]

I just believe in old testament and being strict.

I can honestly say that if I knew 100% that Holmes did it then he should be shot in the back of the head with a large caliber weapon. 

[Random Matt]

I had some time to kill (pun intended) and read the entire thread.  What I have learned is that guns don't kill people, construction accidents kill people for the greater good of society.

[Hate_Then_Skate]

The question also comes down to "What is the purpose of justice?" Do we have a justice system to put revenge in the hands of our government, or do we have a justice system that is designed to limit crime and keep us safe? Or is it somewhere in between?
People keep saying "put yourself in the shoes of the victim's family, and what they want," but since when has that ever been a concern of the government to comfort victims of crime? I don't think I've ever heard of the government picking up the medical bills of a shooting victim, or providing counseling to victims of abuse.
Also, does the death penalty really provide closure for the families of victims? Death penalty cases last years and even decades, that's years and decades of following and focusing on a tragic moment in your life, rather than coping and moving forward. Life sentences are given and that's that. They lock them up, throw away the key, and they don't have trial after trial replaying the emotional events that have unfolded. On top of that, there is no real evidence that the death penalty even provides the expected catharsis after years of intense focus on the tragedy.
I think it would be a better use to spend that money on victim counseling for the families and just avoid the flawed, expensive, and non-deterring method of punishment.

I'm pretty sure the government has provided counseling and shelters for abused women in both the United States and Canada, since the battered women's movement of the 1980s. ? I could be wrong though.

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

Expand Quote

The question also comes down to "What is the purpose of justice?" Do we have a justice system to put revenge in the hands of our government, or do we have a justice system that is designed to limit crime and keep us safe? Or is it somewhere in between?
People keep saying "put yourself in the shoes of the victim's family, and what they want," but since when has that ever been a concern of the government to comfort victims of crime? I don't think I've ever heard of the government picking up the medical bills of a shooting victim, or providing counseling to victims of abuse.
Also, does the death penalty really provide closure for the families of victims? Death penalty cases last years and even decades, that's years and decades of following and focusing on a tragic moment in your life, rather than coping and moving forward. Life sentences are given and that's that. They lock them up, throw away the key, and they don't have trial after trial replaying the emotional events that have unfolded. On top of that, there is no real evidence that the death penalty even provides the expected catharsis after years of intense focus on the tragedy.
I think it would be a better use to spend that money on victim counseling for the families and just avoid the flawed, expensive, and non-deterring method of punishment.

[close]

I'm pretty sure the government has provided counseling and shelters for abused women in both the United States and Canada, since the battered women's movement of the 1980s. ? I could be wrong though.

I'm not totally certain, but I've worked with kids living in abused women's shelters, and all of them have been private/church funded organizations. Its possible the government does this, but I'm pretty sure they don't. They certainly don't pay medical expenses.

Also, whoever was trying to strawman my argument by saying to let him go, he clearly belongs in prison. In fact, there is a whole movement about abolishing prisons, and although they have a lot of great arguments. the James Holmes's of the world make it clear there is a reason for them. We shouldn't privatize them or house 1/4th of the world's prisoners, but a few should stay in prison.

[augustmoon]

speaking of prison:

[Wall of Nausea]

speaking of prison:

Dem fools on sum shit, they fittin' to stay -100 and hiv+100 in a heartbeat, cuz. Real talk.

Seriously though, saw portions of that video earlier today and was confused. What the shit? Is this some sort of awkward disinformation, or just a bunch of dumbasses rattin' on themselves and willing to be that regular and make street code shit viral, anal, fellatio, etc.

Either way that thing is a fun watch till you start seein' that dude street jigg and it's fart footage after 100 mah dudes.

[augustmoon]

Its still not really clear what is going on.  These are tapes that were filmed about 4 years ago and kept in a safe by the Sheriff in New Orleans.  They Feds are trying to take over the jail, and these were just released in court.  The jail (like most things in New Orleans) has been really fucked up for a really long time.  I got arrested for skating back in the 90's and spent the night there.  It was crazy, but I didn't see anything like that.  There are a lot of mysterious deaths/suicides at that place.

[Wall of Nausea]

Its still not really clear what is going on.  These are tapes that were filmed about 4 years ago and kept in a safe by the Sheriff in New Orleans.  They Feds are trying to take over the jail, and these were just released in court.  The jail (like most things in New Orleans) has been really fucked up for a really long time.  I got arrested for skating back in the 90's and spent the night there.  It was crazy, but I didn't see anything like that.  There are a lot of mysterious deaths/suicides at that place.

Dude, this shit would make a rad book. Agreed? I was just curious this tape had some weird ass mystery thing behind it. It's got an eerie feel all around.

[augustmoon]

i think its going to be a pretty big scandal.  it just came out the other day, and is really ramping up.  the police department (and the government in general) has always been really corrupt here.  its all coming to a head now that the feds are involved.  reminds me of an episode of the wire.

[4LOM]

guns don't kill people, construction accidents kill people for the greater good of society.

Finally somebody gets it

[Jackburton]

Expand Quote

I just believe in old testament and being strict.

I can honestly say that if I knew 100% that Holmes did it then he should be shot in the back of the head with a large caliber weapon. 

[close]

You really want a bible quote that refutes another bible quote.  Believing in the old testament is a tongue in cheek way to say you are are not afraid to get your hands dirty for the greater good and that you believe in traditional values.

[KOOL MIKE]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

I just believe in old testament and being strict.

I can honestly say that if I knew 100% that Holmes did it then he should be shot in the back of the head with a large caliber weapon. 

[close]

[close]

You really want a bible quote that refutes another bible quote.  Believing in the old testament is a tongue in cheek way to say you are are not afraid to get your hands dirty for the greater good and that you believe in traditional values.

i believe in my snubnose .38 special

[camel filters]

I think the directly offended victims should decide the criminals fate. The court gives them a list of punishment suited for the conviction and the victims loved ones go to town.

[Ronald Wilson Reagan]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

I just believe in old testament and being strict.

I can honestly say that if I knew 100% that Holmes did it then he should be shot in the back of the head with a large caliber weapon. 

[close]

[close]

You really want a bible quote that refutes another bible quote.  Believing in the old testament is a tongue in cheek way to say you are are not afraid to get your hands dirty for the greater good and that you believe in traditional values.

No.
Also, strict and sadistic aren't the same. Strict means maintaining standards and not folding on them. Sadistic means you have the desire to inflict pain, whatever the reason for it. Justice should be strict, but not sadistic. That's the whole purpose of the 8th amendment.