Trump: "...bring back the death penalty!"

[Elixir]

Normally I would plead the case that the death penalty is a cruel and barbaric anachronism, and lament that in fact it has never left.
But hearing INDIVIDUAL-1 call for its return makes me think it would suit him very well.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I'm not sure I see how the death penalty is any more cruel than solitary confinement. Not supporting the death penalty as I don't believe it to be effective, though. Neither do I think solitary is effective.

 

[phands]

Normally I would plead the case that the death penalty is a cruel and barbaric anachronism, and lament that in fact it has never left.
But hearing INDIVIDUAL-1 call for its return makes me think it would suit him very well.

Once again, the trumpenfuehrer demonstrates his utter ignorance. The death penalty is (ahem) alive and well in about 30 states. Also, most of the time these gun-fondling loonies get the death penalty at the scene of the crime, as they are killed by police.....also, most of them expect to die and don't care, so the death penalty is not a deterrent.

 

[RavenSky]

Normally I would plead the case that the death penalty is a cruel and barbaric anachronism, and lament that in fact it has never left.
But hearing INDIVIDUAL-1 call for its return makes me think it would suit him very well.

Once again, the trumpenfuehrer demonstrates his utter ignorance. The death penalty is (ahem) alive and well in about 30 states...

Including Pennsylvania and at a federal level, where this shooter is being charged.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Normally I would plead the case that the death penalty is a cruel and barbaric anachronism, and lament that in fact it has never left.
But hearing INDIVIDUAL-1 call for its return makes me think it would suit him very well.

Personally, I'm against the death penalty unless 1) the person presents an immediate danger to others and 2) it can be proved without all doubt the person is guilty. It's been established that the US has executed innocent people and I think that is one of the worst things a nation could ever do to one of its citizens.

 

[Opoponax]

For the death penalty to have a deterrent effect, the government would have to be able to summarily execute people for lots of things other than murder, all the way down to relatively minor offenses. It would have to be a thing where at some, or maybe even several points in each person's life, they'd actually see an execution. IOW, the population would have to live in real fear of being killed by the government.

Of course, this would fucking ghoulish and obscene. However, if you were to write the first sentence of this post in pro-argument manner in a conservative forum right now, you'd be quite popular.

 

[SLD]

Fuck Trump

 

[Max Rockatansky]

View attachment 18481

Fuck Trump

LOL. Speaking of Trump/dictators/kings; Dante's Ninth Circle of Hell had Julius Caesar's assassins, Brutus and Cassius, being eternally chewed upon by Satan. In Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar", both are likewise depicted as traitors to a "divinely" appointed dictator/king. In reality, both sought to restore the Roman Republic from the hands of a dictator and, therefore, should be considered Roman heroes.

 

[SLD]

View attachment 18481

Fuck Trump

LOL. Speaking of Trump/dictators/kings; Dante's Ninth Circle of Hell had Julius Caesar's assassins, Brutus and Cassius, being eternally chewed upon by Satan. In Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar", both are likewise depicted as traitors to a "divinely" appointed dictator/king. In reality, both sought to restore the Roman Republic from the hands of a dictator and, therefore, should be considered Roman heroes.

Yes. I’ve read it before. Judas was there too. But there’s an important morality play there apropos today’s troubles. Their assassination of Caesar back fired terribly.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

View attachment 18481

Fuck Trump

LOL. Speaking of Trump/dictators/kings; Dante's Ninth Circle of Hell had Julius Caesar's assassins, Brutus and Cassius, being eternally chewed upon by Satan. In Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar", both are likewise depicted as traitors to a "divinely" appointed dictator/king. In reality, both sought to restore the Roman Republic from the hands of a dictator and, therefore, should be considered Roman heroes.

Yes. I’ve read it before. Judas was there too. But there’s an important morality play there apropos today’s troubles. Their assassination of Caesar back fired terribly.

True, it backfired. The American Revolution is an anomaly because it worked. Most revolutions result in chaos, anarchy and, eventually, despotism and dictatorship. The French and Russian Revolutions are typical examples. In the case of Julius Caesar, are you suggesting that they should have just sat back and took it? Do nothing? At least with Trump we can vote; first in the mid-terms, next in the 2020 election.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Personally, I'm against the death penalty unless 1) the person presents an immediate danger to others and 2) it can be proved without all doubt the person is guilty. It's been established that the US has executed innocent people and I think that is one of the worst things a nation could ever do to one of its citizens.

I mostly agree with you. It's really around the first point that I may have some nuanced differences. I would not oppose execution of Adolf Hitler or Ted Bundy because their guilt is beyond doubt (as in your 2) but their continued existence poses a significant risk to others' lives. It need not be immediate in my view, just significant, but such risk could be mitigated thru medication and conditions of confinement which applies to just about everyone. A person who is a famous leader of a gang of criminals (like Hitler) though has potential to command them from the inside to murder or to be broken out and continue mass murders and a person such as Bundy was an escape artist and killer without a conscience. Perhaps some 99%+ of persons on death row do not meet these criteria of mine. So I am most generally against the death penalty as it is currently practiced.

 

[Gun Nut]

For the death penalty to have a deterrent effect, the government would have to be able to summarily execute people for lots of things other than murder, all the way down to relatively minor offenses. It would have to be a thing where at some, or maybe even several points in each person's life, they'd actually see an execution. IOW, the population would have to live in real fear of being killed by the government.

Of course, this would fucking ghoulish and obscene. However, if you were to write the first sentence of this post in pro-argument manner in a conservative forum right now, you'd be quite popular.

I agree.

I saw something about smoking that your post reminded me of...

Something about if the number of people that dies each year of lung cancer directly tied to habitual smoking, didn't die quietly of cancer hidden away in a hospital, but instead their heads spontaneously exploded, then so many heads would be poping off in public that no one would ever smoke.

Same concept that if in your lifetime you witnessed multiple "hangings", you would be more deterred than just by hearing about someone somewhere being hanged.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Same concept that if in your lifetime you witnessed multiple "hangings", you would be more deterred than just by hearing about someone somewhere being hanged.

Well, aside from the complete lack of any evidence of the deterrent effect of public executions, of course.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Normally I would plead the case that the death penalty is a cruel and barbaric anachronism, and lament that in fact it has never left.
But hearing INDIVIDUAL-1 call for its return makes me think it would suit him very well.

Personally, I'm against the death penalty unless 1) the person presents an immediate danger to others and 2) it can be proved without all doubt the person is guilty. It's been established that the US has executed innocent people and I think that is one of the worst things a nation could ever do to one of its citizens.

Number two there about sums it up for me.

I have no particular issue with the notion that some crimes are worth killing the perpetrator over. However, the system of determining whether or not the accused is guilty is a fairly flawed and faulty one. There have been people in jail for decades who've been freed because of new evidence, uncovering corruption amongst the police, lazy and overworked public defenders, etc. Once you kill a guy, though, there's no system in place for undoing the conviction and letting him be free again, perhaps with compensation due to the destroyed life he's had.

Since the legal system can't be trusted 100%, permanent solutions which can't be rolled back aren't warranted.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Personally, I'm against the death penalty unless 1) the person presents an immediate danger to others and 2) it can be proved without all doubt the person is guilty. It's been established that the US has executed innocent people and I think that is one of the worst things a nation could ever do to one of its citizens.

I mostly agree with you. It's really around the first point that I may have some nuanced differences. I would not oppose execution of Adolf Hitler or Ted Bundy because their guilt is beyond doubt (as in your 2) but their continued existence poses a significant risk to others' lives. It need not be immediate in my view, just significant, but such risk could be mitigated thru medication and conditions of confinement which applies to just about everyone. A person who is a famous leader of a gang of criminals (like Hitler) though has potential to command them from the inside to murder or to be broken out and continue mass murders and a person such as Bundy was an escape artist and killer without a conscience. Perhaps some 99%+ of persons on death row do not meet these criteria of mine. So I am most generally against the death penalty as it is currently practiced.

Well said and agreed. Trump's bullshit about putting all drug dealers to death will only result in more dead cops and innocent bystanders since every drug dealer who is about to be caught has nothing to lose in taking down as many people as possible.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Normally I would plead the case that the death penalty is a cruel and barbaric anachronism, and lament that in fact it has never left.
But hearing INDIVIDUAL-1 call for its return makes me think it would suit him very well.

Personally, I'm against the death penalty unless 1) the person presents an immediate danger to others and 2) it can be proved without all doubt the person is guilty. It's been established that the US has executed innocent people and I think that is one of the worst things a nation could ever do to one of its citizens.

Number two there about sums it up for me.

I have no particular issue with the notion that some crimes are worth killing the perpetrator over. However, the system of determining whether or not the accused is guilty is a fairly flawed and faulty one. There have been people in jail for decades who've been freed because of new evidence, uncovering corruption amongst the police, lazy and overworked public defenders, etc. Once you kill a guy, though, there's no system in place for undoing the conviction and letting him be free again, perhaps with compensation due to the destroyed life he's had.

Since the legal system can't be trusted 100%, permanent solutions which can't be rolled back aren't warranted.

An excellent statement.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

An excellent statement.

A potentially excellent statement. In the event that new evidence comes to light casting doubt on it's excellence, there does need to be some process available for people to rescind their opinion of it. We can't just have it marked as being excellent with no way to go back from that.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

An excellent statement.

A potentially excellent statement. In the event that new evidence comes to light casting doubt on it's excellence, there does need to be some process available for people to rescind their opinion of it. We can't just have it marked as being excellent with no way to go back from that.

The fact remains, "We, the People" shouldn't be executing people if we're only 99.9% sure someone is guilty. It must be 100%.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Same concept that if in your lifetime you witnessed multiple "hangings", you would be more deterred than just by hearing about someone somewhere being hanged.

Well, aside from the complete lack of any evidence of the deterrent effect of public executions, of course.

Hell, Public Executions used to be prime pick-pocket events in England, back when picking pockets was a hanging offense.

 

[Gun Nut]

Same concept that if in your lifetime you witnessed multiple "hangings", you would be more deterred than just by hearing about someone somewhere being hanged.

Well, aside from the complete lack of any evidence of the deterrent effect of public executions, of course.

You snipped out the context of what was someone else's social thought experiment about heads exploding versus dying quietly in a bed.