EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 1222
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
farvacola
United States18819 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7814 Posts
On March 17 2019 19:25 Sent. wrote: How is a delayed abortion of an irredeemable individual more costly than keeping them in a high security prison for 40 years? That's just wrong. + Show Spoiler + In a March 2015 YouGov survey commissioned by the Hoover Institution, respondents in France and Britain (about 1,200 in each) were asked their opinions about capital punishment. Specifically, they reported their own views and their impressions of the stances of the major political parties toward the justifiability of death sentences for “some serious crimes, such as pre-meditated murder or acts of terrorism that cause multiple deaths.” The results suggest that, on this issue, the major parties in two of the largest EU nations are out of step with most of the people they aim to represent. In the UK, opinion leans toward favoring capital punishment with 50% of respondents saying they endorse the death penalty for serious crimes, and 35% saying they do not (the other 15% said they were unsure). A separate August 2014 YouGov poll found 45% support and 39% opposition, so the public might have shifted to the pro-side in the interim, though the questions were not identically worded. The only party perceived to be on the majority side, meanwhile, was the populist and anti-EU UK Independence Party (UKIP), which 30% thought was pro-death penalty, against 18% saying it was anti- (the majority of respondents were thus unsure of what position the party holds on the matter, or if it has one at all). Respondents saw all other parties as opposed, with 44% of respondents saying the Conservatives were anti-death penalty compared to the 14% who said the party was pro—and more than ten times as many respondents saying that the Labour, Liberal Democrat, and Scottish National parties were opposed versus in favor of capital punishment. Across the channel, many French respondents probably recalled the Charlie Hebdo attack that left 12 people dead while answering the poll’s question about capital punishment. So perhaps it is not surprising that the French were even more pro-death penalty than the British, with 53% endorsing it, and only 29% not in support. Respondents overwhelmingly saw the right-wing National Front as holding the majority position, but no other party was at all widely perceived to favor capital punishment. https://www.hoover.org/research/europe-and-death-penalty The polls in the spoilers are less than 6 years old. I found more but those were ~10 years older so didn't quote them. Except that the poll in France, which was published in Le Monde is bogus as explained in the article below and goes against all trends observed sinced the 80’s. 70% of French people are against the return of death penalty and the only party that supports it is the neo fascist Front National. http://www.observationsociete.fr/modes-de-vie/valeurs-un-large-consensus-contre-la-peine-de-mort.html Generally speaking no political party except far right extremist supports the death penalty in western Europe. It’s a barbarian and frankly horrifying practice that is progressively disappearing. I can’t understand for the life of me how a sane person can lament that the State he pay taxes to doesn’t electrocute or poison people to death. Justice is not revenge. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7814 Posts
On March 17 2019 20:47 farvacola wrote: The problem is that the system of review, the one ostensibly designed to ensure due process prior to execution, is costly, lengthy, and extremely complex, especially with regards to the state/federal divide. Making it more efficient risks making the process even less fair, so that’s why many folks say that the death penalty should simply be gotten rid of. Doing it “right” costs more than simply letting them rot in prison. Generally speaking, people killed by the justice system in the US are poor, badly defended, mentally challenged or simply mentally ill, and so forth and so on. It’s proven time and time and time again that death penalty is horribly costly and has no deterence effect. This shit has to go. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35097 Posts
On March 17 2019 22:05 Biff The Understudy wrote: Except that the poll in France, which was published in Le Monde is bogus as explained in the article below and goes against all trends observed sinced the 80’s. 70% of French people are against the return of death penalty and the only party that supports it is the neo fascist Front National. http://www.observationsociete.fr/modes-de-vie/valeurs-un-large-consensus-contre-la-peine-de-mort.html Generally speaking no political party except far right extremist supports the death penalty in western Europe. It’s a barbarian and frankly horrifying practice that is progressively disappearing. I can’t understand for the life of me how a sane person can lament that the State he pay taxes to doesn’t electrocute or poison people to death. Justice is not revenge. And this is a large problem that the US has. Revenge under the guise of Justice is often not only dismissed as not being an issue, but is often the subject of humor. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18819 Posts
On March 17 2019 22:08 Biff The Understudy wrote: Generally speaking, people killed by the justice system in the US are poor, badly defended, mentally challenged or simply mentally ill, and so forth and so on. It’s proven time and time and time again that death penalty is horribly costly and has no deterence effect. This shit has to go. Luckily, many state governments are recognizing these problems and are slowing down/stopping the execution process. Hopefully, I'll be able to see the end of the death penalty here in the US during my lifetime, but, like Gahlo mentions and I can't stress this enough, the extent to which Americans love their retributive justice (a potential oxymoron, I know) can't be overstated. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4663 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States13754 Posts
I mean hanging was pretty effective and human but that was pretty primitive. Lethal injection is (especially with the euro ban on the chemicals making shortages a thing) not a viable alternative to just jailing them for life the same that keeping pot illegal is not a viable alternative to heroin based pain meds. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Yurie
11692 Posts
On March 17 2019 23:59 Sermokala wrote: I support the concept of the death penalty and would defend it in a debate but its a lot like a reverse marijuana argument for me. I really agree with it but the reality of it means I can't really agree with it. I mean hanging was pretty effective and human but that was pretty primitive. Lethal injection is (especially with the euro ban on the chemicals making shortages a thing) not a viable alternative to just jailing them for life the same that keeping pot illegal is not a viable alternative to heroin based pain meds. You mean the classical type of hanging where you drop the person 5 cm and they strangle to death? Or the more modern variant where you have a long drop so the neck breaks? The second one is more or less the same as a shooting squad or lethal injection. Tension up until the occasion, then done. The first one is a public spectacle that drew large audiences historically. Classical hanging would fall into the snuff category of entertainment if public. Which is illegal in most western countries. https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-61-blitz-painfotainment/ That podcast/audio book is a pretty good summary of the history of executions. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43831 Posts
On March 18 2019 01:29 JimmiC wrote: I wouldn't be for the death penalty but I would be for life in prison, no chance of parole for Pedophiles, considering there is no cure and their victims are innocent. Those are the people we should be locking and throwing away the key on. Just to clarify semantics: you mean "no chance of parole for child molesters", not pedophiles, right? Being a pedophile is just the psychological condition of being attracted to children, not the actual committing of any sexual action with those children. Most pedophiles understand the stigma attached to their disorder, as well as the fact that the group of people they're attracted to can't consent, and so they don't actually act on their urges. It's not illegal to have the psychological disorder of pedophilia, and I can only imagine how depressing it must be to live with that kind of inherent urge while understanding just how awful and immoral it is. The victim of pedophilia is the pedophile and his internal struggle; the victim of child molestation is obviously the child. I've also read that cognitive-behavioral therapy, relapse-prevention therapy (as in, treating it like you would an addiction), and even some medication can possibly help to treat pedophilia, although I don't think the disorder has been established to be curable, per se. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States43831 Posts
On March 18 2019 03:21 JimmiC wrote: Sure that works for me. Everything I have read said none of those medications or therapy's have been effective. But yes I wouldn't want the thought police out there. But if people are trading in sexual images of young children I would be fine with them being locked up as well. That is not a victim-less crime. I definitely agree with you that taking and sharing sexual images of children is not a victimless crime. | ||
|
Slydie
1900 Posts
-There WILL be mistakes, and just that there is a posibility that the state kills someone inocent is enough to never do it imo. -If the state justifies killing someone for the right reasons, it promotes an ethic standard which leads to more violence rather than less. Friends and family of the killed-by-the-state will in turn be more sceptical and even hate the system, regardless if a crime was committed or not. -Death is a very powerful symbol, and killing terrorists by DP can turn them into icons. It is very easy to create myths about someone who is dead. Look at Che, for example, who has become a huge international symbol, without much reflection about the full extent of what he stood for. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9108 Posts
- There WILL also be mistakes like allowing the prisoner to escape or kill someone while in prison. - I don't think executing someone like Breivik would lead to more violence (excluding his death obviously). - Nothing stops the state from killing the terrorists 10 years (or more) after capturing them, when they're no longer a potential icon (or already are an icon). Breivik would not become a symbol if executed in 2021. I mean, he's already an alt-right meme, but I don't think killing him in 2021 or later would change much. Also, both Breivik and Che Guevara are political icons, but usually it's not the case with criminals killed by the state. Some random child killer killed in the 60s did not become an icon despite being executed for his crimes. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States42019 Posts
If someone maintains their innocence and hopes time will vindicate them then I’m fine with life, if not I’m also fine with death. Putting them in a box and waiting for time to kill them isn’t a life, it’s a slow execution. | ||
|
brian
United States9610 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11342 Posts
On March 18 2019 05:58 KwarK wrote: Lifetime imprisonment is still a death sentence, the method used is just more cruel and unusual. The only meaningful advantage of lifetime imprisonment over hanging to me is that there is the opportunity to correct fuckups if they’re still alive. If someone maintains their innocence and hopes time will vindicate them then I’m fine with life, if not I’m also fine with death. Putting them in a box and waiting for time to kill them isn’t a life, it’s a slow execution. One could consider giving them the choice between the two options. I can sadly already see a bunch of ways as to how that can lead to major abuse though. In general, i am not a fan of either option, though. Life in prison without any chance of parole and the death penalty both seem a lot more like revenge than justice, or trying to maximize the positive of society. A good justice system in my opinion should always have the two goals of minimizing crime and rehabilitating criminals to be positive members of society. As far as i know, it has been shown many times that the deterrence does not really scale well with the maximum possible punishment, it mostly depends on how likely the criminals think that that punishment will be. Thus, extremely high sentences do not help reduce crime as a deterrent, and in fact the money spent on extremely harsh sentences would be better spent on increasing the likelyhood of criminals getting punished, for example by increasing police efficiency. A death sentence (or life without parole) might help reduce crime by making sure that that person does not commit any further crimes. Efficient rehabilitation would do the same, however. It also gives society all of the good that the rehabilitated person will achieve throughout the rest of their life as a bonus. And if someone is truly seen as not rehabilitable, there must be better ways to "store" them for the rest of their lives then prison, as they must surely have major mental problems, and prisons usually don't handle these well anyways. Lower and less horrifically life-ending sentences can also reduce the amount of crimes because criminals no longer feel that they have nothing to lose. If you know or suspect that getting caught by police is the end of your life, you will do anything to prevent that. This also means that prisons must be run completely differently from how they are currently run in the US. The goal of prison should not be to punish, but to rehabilitate. As such, prison needs to be less horrific, and give the prisoners more abilities to obtain skills and mental dispositions helpful for being a productive member of society, and the surroundings that make efficiently learning those skills as easy as possible and as desirable as possible. Society needs to shift from a "prison is punishment" mentality to something like "prison is a hospital that cures criminality". Incentives for prisons must be set in a way that rewards them if their inmates rehabilitate efficiently into society after leaving prison, instead of rewarding "storing" people as cheaply as possible. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13754 Posts
On March 18 2019 01:48 Yurie wrote: You mean the classical type of hanging where you drop the person 5 cm and they strangle to death? Or the more modern variant where you have a long drop so the neck breaks? The second one is more or less the same as a shooting squad or lethal injection. Tension up until the occasion, then done. The first one is a public spectacle that drew large audiences historically. Classical hanging would fall into the snuff category of entertainment if public. Which is illegal in most western countries. https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-61-blitz-painfotainment/ That podcast/audio book is a pretty good summary of the history of executions. Yes I watched a good movie on a British dude who was in charge of it in WW2. Great movie on its own and as a discussion on the morals of execution and morals in general. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3187 Posts
On March 18 2019 05:58 KwarK wrote: Lifetime imprisonment is still a death sentence, the method used is just more cruel and unusual. The only meaningful advantage of lifetime imprisonment over hanging to me is that there is the opportunity to correct fuckups if they’re still alive. If someone maintains their innocence and hopes time will vindicate them then I’m fine with life, if not I’m also fine with death. Putting them in a box and waiting for time to kill them isn’t a life, it’s a slow execution. This reasoning seems to operate from the premise that a life in prison has no value. What gives a human life value is a large philosophical question I don’t have a good answer to, but both to the individual ls thrmselves and to the people around them, I don’t think life imprisonment would feel functionally equivalent to death. Offered the choice of spending my remaining 50 years or w/e in prison or dying a lot sooner, I don’t know for certain what I would choose but I’m confident they wouldn’t seem like basically the same thing. | ||
| ||
