Capital Punishment?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 12 2007, 10:38 AM) [snapback]404170[/snapback]</div>

Speaking of Cults, we had a group of teenagers that would abduct peoples house cats, twist their heads until they would pop the necks with their bare hands they would then sacrafice them to Satan....

We happened to stumble onto them in some woods looking for a lost child ... :angry:
The ASCPCA threw the book at them for animal cruelty.....

I just dont know how someone could do that to a pet.....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hycamguy07 @ Mar 12 2007, 11:20 AM) [snapback]404237[/snapback]</div>

They thought it was "cool", but it's anything but that. :blink:

Fortunately, the US is catching up with other countries in their treatment of animal cruelity.

 

Remembering college and one of the psych classes I had to elect this comes to mind: behaviour modification is based on correcting a wrong behaviour:

* immediately after it happens aka a consequence
* as soon as possible after the event, as long as cognizant connections can be made by the perpetrator
* need to be reinforced in preventative measures, i.a.w., the behaviour must be monitored and interfered/intercepted when a violation is about to occur.
* all the above must be done until the behaviour is acceptable

This is where basic punishment such as incarceration, capital punishment etc breaks down. Most perpetrators are so wrapped up in self denial and self righteousness, that from a psychological point of view no connection is made between the wrong behaviour and the punishment/correction exacted. Never mind the time it takes to actually arrest someone.

In fact most punishment is viewed as an injustice and their anger is set against the law and its society abiding and supporting it. Hence you get repeat offenders who are more angry and more violent then the first time around.

As far as the Satanist go, this reinforces my point I was trying to make earlier, that the perceived superiority of ones religious convictions trumps common decency and plain old common sense (not to mention law) and those kids are probably so convinced or should it be confused(?) that they are well within their right, that any punishment given, is used to justify their continued struggle against the oppressive majority

I am at loss as to what you can do to teach them a lesson and see that they have to express their beliefs in an acceptable way.... chaing gang, physical hard labor? earn societal brownie points?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 12 2007, 08:52 AM) [snapback]404198[/snapback]</div>

Except when the rich are hurting the poor by polluting, selling exploding cars, busting unions to keep wages low. Then it's "the free market" and all perfectly legal.

The laws are written by the rich, for the rich. The things the poor do to hurt the rich are illegal. The things the rich do to hurt the poor are legal.

Then there's differential enforcement:

Case 1: A well-groomed man in a business suit with a briefcase is standing on a street corner for half an hour. A cop comes along. Cop asks, are you okay? Man replies that he's waiting for a business associate to pick him up. Cop tells him to have a nice day and continues on his rounds

Case 2: An unwashed man in ragged clothing with a backpack is standing on a street corner for half an hour. Cop comes by and asks what he's doing there. Man says he's waiting for his buddy. Cop tells him, loitering is illegal, move along!

Same exact action. But the cop treats the dirty man as a criminal while allowing the well-dressed man to act exactly the same.

The laws are written to favor the rich, and enforced primarily against the poor. A rich man goes to prison only when he's done serious harm to someone wealthier than himself. And not always, even then.

Case 3 (Witnessed by me, involving an American Indian man I knew. This man is always gentle and peaceful. The cop knew him also, and knew him to be gentle and peaceful.) The man was intoxicated and had asked for a ride to detox. I could not drive him because I was the only one on duty at the shelter. I could not allow him to stay because of strict rules. So at his request I phoned the cops to ask them to give him a ride to detox. The cop handcuffed him behind his back, which is very uncomfortable. I told the cop cuffs were not needed because the man was perfectly peaceful, and always was. The cop said he knew this man is always peaceful, but "the rules require it." I asked him then to put the cuffs on in front instead of in back. Cop apologized, repeating that the rules required it. Even though the man was going to be in the back seat of the cop car, where he could not have hurt the cop even had he been violent.

Case 4, 5, 6, 7, etc.: I have been arrested numerous times. But I'm white and clearly middle-class. I have never been handcuffed behind my back by the cops, and I was once arrested and put in the front seat without handcuffs at all. Apparently they're happy to break their own rules in favor of a white middle-class man.

The only time I've been handcuffed behind my back was when the actual arrest was done by the Air Force guards, who always follow their own rules. And on one such case, when they turned me over to the cops, the cops removed the cuffs and replaced them in front.

The law is anything but fair, and enforcement is anything but equal.

The guy that raped and murdered that little girl is a madman and deserves worse than anything they're likely to do to him. But how many little girls, just as innocent, were murdered in cold blood by the Ford execs who decided to market the Pinto, knowing it would explode? If I were to advocate the death penalty for those Ford execs I'd be laughed out of court. Why? Because there's a presumption that the profit motive (i.e. Corporate Greed) justifies some finite amount of innocent deaths.

In feudal times, the lord of the manor could do whatever he liked. Today, corporate execs can do whatever they like. Nothing's changed. The purpose of the law is to protect the interests of the people who make the law.

 

BM is seeking to correct behavioural infractions to achieve an accepted or desired result. This is not just for kids, although admittedly most criminals are at an infant stage with regards to accepting and realizing their societal contract and how to operate with in it.

I was not offering any solutions. I was merely presenting what I thought is the absolute basis for correcting ANY wrong or harmful behaviour. I have no idea how this can be implemented without setting up a big brother sytem, so that justice can be exacted the moment one breaks a law.

Now should a punishment fit the crime or rather the criminal thought process and behaviour that has bent and twisted a person into an abhorrent human being? I cannot disguise, nor do I want to, my knee jerk reaction wanting to exact some serious justice on the rapist and murderer in the starting post. However, I still feel that releasing him from his obligation to society to help prevent future murders and freeing him from having to actually work through and come to soul shattering terms with the wrong he has done, is a cheap and easy way out. Someone posted earlier that life time incarceration is cruel ...YES absolutely correct. Someone who has violated societal norms and disrupted societal life, has forfeit his/her right to continue on the easy path of living or dying. This person has now handed over their own life to our purposes to study and test ways on how to prevent such deviant behaviour.

Basically they have now become a test case and I don't mean lavish them with cable tv, and books and work out sessions etc. Bare bones existence, maybe hard physical labour.

 

Oh on the topic of the ENRON guys, I do have a suggestion based on my own experience. My father just retired as the Super Intended for the White Collar Crime Unit in Europe. In having dealt with crooks and cheaters for over 40 years, he has provided me with several insights that have shaped this opinion.

Most white collar criminals are megalomaniacs, persons whose hubris is so great that they not only feel untouchable, but they have elevated themselves and their families to level above the rest of society and the law. Pride is one of the driving factors here. Nothing would cut these bassards (there I judged them down to size more then sustained public humiliation. I say, let them wear orange jump suits with their name and crime printed on the back. maybe even former title and then let them clean out public toilets, trash receptacles, clean up highways in a chain gang so that everyone can see that you *can* fall from your self built ivory tower. Additionally, they have to witness the sale of their goods and possessions, and watch the monies go back to those they cheated.

Lets get started.. and dying is not a option... damn you Ken Lay !

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Lywyllyn @ Mar 12 2007, 01:01 PM) [snapback]404290[/snapback]</div>

This reminds me of a British poll during WWII of the punishment that would best fit 8-off. The answer was to parade him around in a cage while people laugh at him.

I would probably be quite comfortable with that - as his health would not let him life too many years anyway.

The Puritans used this in a number of instances. Rember the Scarlet A? Maybe that would work on Clinton and Gingrich?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 12 2007, 02:21 PM) [snapback]404293[/snapback]</div>

Mmmh well you use the words "their law" so in this case that is truly that countries business and not ours!!! We have enough work to do to keep our own law and its enforcement in working order.
Quoth Wikipedia: "Sharia law is a strictly codified uniform set of laws pertaining to Sharia, more like a system of devising laws, based on the Qur'an, Hadith and centuries of debate, interpretation and precedent."

If that is the manner in which a given government wants to operate, then that is their business. One can argue for or against it but ultimately the only way you can convince someone to your point of view and your choice of law, liberty and life(!) is by leading an exceptional life worth emulating. Only then can change, that comes from within and not from the outside, be successful and transcend all boundaries, be it geographical, national or spiritual.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 11 2007, 08:21 PM) [snapback]403941[/snapback]</div>

I appreciate the compliment. I do what I'm doing because young people represent the future. The way I view it is either they will be successful, pay taxes, be good citizens, and pay my Social Security or if they fail we will pay for them for the rest of their lives. I see no reason to want any individual to fail in life. Aside from monetary consideration a person would have to be extremely mean to be happy when another individual fails in life. I was not raised that way. I tell young children that they must change the way the world is run now when they become adults because the adults that ruin the world now are doing a lousy job and people must stop fighting and warring with each other. I don't really believe that everyone will ever get along with each other, but I do believe that it is possible to live in peace and not wanting to destroy others.

Young people need to know the truth to a point. I won't lie to them or sugarcoat what is real. However, I talked to them in a way that they understand where I'm coming from without being afraid of the future. I hope the and 20 or 30 years the world we live in will be a much better place than it is now. I should like to live out the rest of my years with as little stress as possible.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Mar 12 2007, 06:49 AM) [snapback]404177[/snapback]</div>

Capital punishment may be effective. I have a friend who lived in Saudi Arabia as a kid. At ten, when they first got there, they were required to attend a beheading so they would know not to touch a Saudi girl or be found with alcohol. It worked. He didn't touch Saudi girls or alcohol while living there.

The question for me is not if its effective ... unless it was absolutely, overwhelmingly effective and saved many lives. The question for me has to be if I put enough faith in our legal system to always be comfortable that the accused is guilty and deserving of death. I'm not sure the same legal system that allows OJ to be out golfing every day can be trusted with the power to take a life.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 12 2007, 10:28 PM) [snapback]404649[/snapback]</div>

But Couey confessed could you trust it for those instances or would that just invite the timid suciders to confess?

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Mar 12 2007, 01:51 PM) [snapback]404252[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 13 2007, 01:28 AM) [snapback]404649[/snapback]</div>

:blink: :blink: I wouldnt be touching or drinking with the girls either!!!! I believe they even have the death sentence for getting caught being a Butt Pirate.. Or if you steal they cut off your hand.... B)

That would work!!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hycamguy07 @ Mar 13 2007, 07:16 AM) [snapback]404752[/snapback]</div>

I do hope that you are aware that police departments can make modifications to the exploding Crown Vic PI to greatly minimize that sort of danger.

http://www.firepanelllc.com

The usual modification is made on a control arm bolt near the rear axle. Another popular modification - though very expensive - is to fit the PI with a fire suppression system. Apparently all new PI’s come with a factory fire suppression system

https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/CVPI/FireSuppression.asp

http://www.crownvictoriasafetyalert.com/timeline.html

So it looks like all the bad press and lawsuits by various departments will help to save your life if you’re ever rear ended by a s***faced driver while stopped for a routine traffic enforcement.

Oh, it's really annoying trying to reply to your comments when you insert your reply into the previous response.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Mar 10 2007, 09:19 PM) [snapback]403618[/snapback]</div>

Well, now I know more.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jayman @ Mar 13 2007, 02:33 PM) [snapback]404944[/snapback]</div>

Lets see, what excuse do I have for the above statement..... Hmm I do this when either I do not have the time answer each question or Im just lazy at the time.....

PS. great links though.....

Ill even add a few:

www.dps.mo.gov/home/moveOverVideo.htm

www.theiacp.org/div_seccom/Committees/LESS/AZ_DPS_files/frame.htm

www.policedriving.com/crownvic.htm

Please note, the police crown victoria, civilian crown victoria & the mercury grand marquies are the same car and set up... B)

 

So on this case, seeing as I live in Florida and was hounded with it forever...

He's clearly guilty. He's confessed [more than once, I believe. I think this is the one where they had to throw out the first confession]. I don't think innocence is a possiblity here. I'm inclined to lean towards the death penalty as an appropriate punishment, however, being someone's bitch in prision would serve him right as well.

I've read about notorious serial killers [John Wayne Gacy, etc.] on crimelibrary.com. While Couey isn't a serial killer, he's evidently deeply disturbed. There are some cases where this is simply not correctable and to release them or risk their escape puts the public in danger. I'd never be for abolishing the death penalty completely.

Oh, and isn't the Bible where we get that whole "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" thing? That's the verse I see most commonly referenced to support capital punishment.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Mar 13 2007, 01:30 AM) [snapback]404735[/snapback]</div>

I'm always torn in these debates, because the only way to ensure that someone like Couey doesn't re-offend is to kill him. And he certainly deserves death, even if he has the IQ of a slug (which I doubt, since he hid her, then buried her, to keep her from telling others).

But a confession is not really proof of guilt. There are numerous examples of people who confess to crimes they don't commit ... its so frequent, in fact, that detectives often have quite a few "confessors" to high profile crimes.

I'm more comfortable with DNA, blood type or fingerprint evidence (which we have in abundance in the case of Couey). I'm less comfortable with eyewitness testimony, as it is notoriously bad.

But in the end, it isn't my comfort level with the type or kind of evidence collected. Its my comfort level with the system itself. Giving the state power to arrest, charge, try and execute someone is giving the state the ultimate power. If there are alternatives to the death penalty, that are just as "permanent" but still reversible in case error is found, we should take them. The problem is we have a system where the Executive branch can, in most states, unilaterally pardon anyone. LWOPP (life without parole or pardon) would be my preferred method. The only reason some people should get out is if they are found to have been convicted in error.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(rainydysandmondys @ Mar 13 2007, 05:34 PM) [snapback]405103[/snapback]</div>

Yep, in its time, it was a sentiment that limited the action of the authorities. You wouldn't kill someone for stealing a loaf of bread, but if they committed murder, you could kill them. There are some verses around that one that reinforces it some more, with language like "because he has spilled man's blood, so shall man spill his" and that sort of thing (working from very hazy memory here!)

We tend to read that statement and think it is all cut and dried, but the Jews had a pretty robust legal system with some good checks and balances, according to a rabbi I knew.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Mar 13 2007, 09:00 PM) [snapback]405158[/snapback]</div>

One of the safeguards in Jewish law is that capital punishment cannot be imposed by a Beit Din unless there are two eyewitnesses to the crime and they warned the murderer of the consequences of his act before it was carried out.

Jewish Law

Ask Moses