To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 27469
27468  |  27470
Subject: 
Re: Excellent news!
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 4 Jan 2006 18:01:22 GMT
Viewed: 
1696 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:

   Of course not! The execution of a person who has been rendered harmless is indistinguishable from coldblooded murder.

I reject your equivocation. In one case, the victim is an innocent, and in the other the “victim” is a coldblooded murderer. Being rendered “harmless” does in no way make a person “blameless”.

   My point in linking to those articles (one of which now appears unlinked, alas) is to show that the execution of potentially innocent people is nothing like the “it never happens” assertion put forth by advocates death penalty.

No system is perfect. To criticize otherwise seems unreasonable.

   I should hope that everyone who is scheduled for execution actually committed the crimes of which they’re convicted. That would seem the minimal requirement for the death penalty. Do you think otherwise?

Cleverly understated:-) But of course, Dave!
  
And even if we eliminate the accidental(?) execution of innocent people, the death penalty is still an ugly throwback to our not-so-distant barbaric past and should be abolished as the savage, government-sanctioned murder that it really is.

Listen, as long as people barbarically take the life of innocents, there should be an “old-school” punishment for their efforts. It is simply not “enlightened” to keep murderers alive.

  
   What about the fate of a man who kills 5 women and children during a botched bank robbery where he is captured at the scene. Presumably, then, you feel comfortable enough to execute him?

Of course not! If he’s rendered harmless (ie., he’s captured, then there is no justification for murdering him. Well, other than raw vengeance, which is no justification at all.

Vengeance doesn’t enter in to it. It is about justice to the victims and preserving the sanctity of life for society.

JOHN



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Excellent news!
 
--SNIP-- (...) Preserving the sanctity of life by State-sanctioned killing. Interesting argument there. Tim (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
  Re: Excellent news!
 
(...) I see that you are rebutting my "equivocation" with a straw man. Nowhere do I claim that the murderer is blameless, but I don't equate his "blamefulness" (sorry about that malapropism) with some "right" to execute him. And the person (or (...) (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Excellent news!
 
(...) Since I dragged Bruce back into this, I'll field the question for him (though he's welcome to refute or add to it, of course!) (...) Of course not! The execution of a person who has been rendered harmless is indistinguishable from coldblooded (...) (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

55 Messages in This Thread:












Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR