PDA

View Full Version : Death Penalty Update


Wonderment
10-12-2009, 11:50 PM
Saturday, Oct. 10, was World Day Against the Death Penalty.

Since 2003 those of us committed to abolishing the death penalty have organized Oct. 10 events.

There's lot of info and ways to take action at World Coalition Against the Death Penalty http://www.worldcoalition.org

The big good news in the USA this year is that New Mexico has abolished the death penalty. Internationally, Togo and Burundi abolished, while Kenya and Morocco commuted all current death sentences.

Worldwide in 2008, only 25 countries carried out executions. 93% of them occurred in five countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

JonIrenicus
10-13-2009, 06:49 PM
Saturday, Oct. 10, was World Day Against the Death Penalty.

Since 2003 those of us committed to abolishing the death penalty have organized Oct. 10 events.

There's lot of info and ways to take action at World Coalition Against the Death Penalty http://www.worldcoalition.org

The big good news in the USA this year is that New Mexico has abolished the death penalty. Internationally, Togo and Burundi abolished, while Kenya and Morocco commuted all current death sentences.

Worldwide in 2008, only 25 countries carried out executions. 93% of them occurred in five countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

And of those 5, the US has it most right. Killing the people who actually deserve to die. But then to believe that one would have to have the capacity to think that not all human life was sacred, in and of itself.

bjkeefe
10-15-2009, 04:52 PM
Saturday, Oct. 10, was World Day Against the Death Penalty.

One wonders how many knew about this in Texas (http://wonkette.com/411648/kay-bailey-hutchison-is-president-of-argumentation).

And be sure to follow the Balloon Juice link at the end of the post, too.

nikkibong
10-16-2009, 03:45 PM
Worldwide in 2008, only 25 countries carried out executions. 93% of them occurred in five countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Thousands of North Koreans are murdered by their government each year. Perhaps this doesnt count as "execution" because it lacks the requisite veneer of "procedure."

In any event, many thanks for the update.

Whatfur
10-16-2009, 03:49 PM
Saturday, Oct. 10, was World Day Against the Death Penalty.

...

Worldwide in 2008, only 25 countries carried out executions. 93% of them occurred in five countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

Care to break down that 93%?

How much you want to bet that the Taliban murdered more in Afghanistan than the U.S. executed?

JonIrenicus
10-16-2009, 05:05 PM
Care to break down that 93%?

How much you want to bet that the Taliban murdered more in Afghanistan than the U.S. executed?

The only numbers that count are the ones that vaguely mimic practices we in the west engage in (i.e. death penalty killings).

Other murders like genocide ad ethnic cleansing by factions within a country are less egregious as the ability to compare the US negatively is completely gone.


You would think, on the triage of liberal concerns about harm done, the death penalty would be among the lowest issues, at least in those cases (in the US) presumably most of those being put to death are murders or worse.


But then again, that assumes one would look upon unrepentant murderers as wholly different from the rest of the population (I'd probably be more lax about death penalty applications btw).

That one could distinguish the killing of a man like this (in theory, the dutch, unfortunately, do not execute)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Bouyeri#Trial

Pay VERY close attention to his response at trial to the victims family

and the killing of people like this

http://towleroad.typepad.com/towleroad/2005/07/report_gay_yout.html


If you CANNOT distinguish between those two killings, think they are EQUALLY wrong, there is nothing to say but your ethics are a mess.

Whatfur
10-16-2009, 06:50 PM
The only numbers that count are the ones that vaguely mimic practices we in the west engage in (i.e. death penalty killings).

Other murders like genocide ad ethnic cleansing by factions within a country are less egregious as the ability to compare the US negatively is completely gone.


Obviously, Jon, I was first looking for the actual numbers between the 4 countries listed because, of course, to include any number of countries (other than one) when giving a % like that...can often be misleading.

Also, obvious to most I hope, I was not comparing the actual acts but the numbers... and like you, I think, showing how ludicrous it is for the left to be worrying about a death penalty here, while ignoring (or in Wonderment's case, advocating for) murders without a trial in countries not a part of his list.


Other murders like genocide ad ethnic cleansing by factions within a country are less egregious as the ability to compare the US negatively is completely gone.

Not sure I understand what you are saying here. On face value, it seems a bit disjointed. Inability to compare, does not make any act less egregious.
You would think, on the triage of liberal concerns about harm done, the death penalty would be among the lowest issues, at least in those cases (in the US) presumably most of those being put to death are murders or worse.

Here you are clear, and I agree.

But then again, that assumes one would look upon unrepentant murderers as wholly different from the rest of the population (I'd probably be more lax about death penalty applications btw).

Ok, lost me again. Ummm..yes they are different in that they have chosen to kill someone. "Wholly", you would have to define but...So?

That one could distinguish the killing of a man like this (in theory, the dutch, unfortunately, do not execute)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Bouyeri#Trial

Pay VERY close attention to his response at trial to the victims family

and the killing of people like this

http://towleroad.typepad.com/towleroad/2005/07/report_gay_yout.html


If you CANNOT distinguish between those two killings, think they are EQUALLY wrong, there is nothing to say but your ethics are a mess.
Actually these two cases are easily distinguishable, but I am still perplexed as to the rationality of your retort. Sorry.

JonIrenicus
10-16-2009, 07:47 PM
Actually these two cases are easily distinguishable, but I am still perplexed as to the rationality of your retort. Sorry.

More an assist than a retort.

I was trying to point to the absurdity of seeing all death penalty cases as equally wrong.

Some people see all cases of the death penalty as wrong. Making no distinction to the rationales to the penalty in places like Iran or N Korea and places like the US.


I do wonder if the purists against the death penalty in all cases think it is less wrong to kill some people based off their actions. Or if they think all death penalty applications are equally abhorrent.

It is that latter group that are most alien to me. It seems what they essentially believe is that there is something sacred about all human life. And that no matter what an individual does or becomes, they remain a part of that sort of sacred community, protected, just like all the others.

That is a place I cannot go. I grant the first part at the start, that human life is not be taken, but there are cases and behaviors that seem to forfeit such special considerations, like that flagrant example of unrepentant, in fact, prideful murder of Theo Van Gogh.

I do not consider such a man the same as the rest of us, I see him as less than. Precisely the type of person that does NOT warrant the same consideration of his life being sacred.

Of course this viewpoint has consequences. It is a view that does NOT seek to expand the circle some might say, but to exclude some as "the other." In my view it is deserved and useful, it makes it far easier to go after and fight such individuals. And while some may agree logically with such a stance, emotionally it may make them uncomfortable enough to reject it.

I think that is the difference between an essentially liberal guy like Hitchens and guys with a more pacifist strain like Bob, UN Plaza folk, etc.


I'm just a part of that group that does NOT want to expand the circle to ALL people, that some behaviors are so abhorrent to me that I much prefer to excise them from the larger "decent" population and in some cases, have them destroyed outright.


Consequences. It makes you wonder how many unconscious steps and rationales people have that influence their positions.


Or maybe this is all nonsense. Maybe.

Whatfur
10-16-2009, 08:30 PM
More an assist than a retort.

I was trying to point to the absurdity of seeing all death penalty cases as equally wrong.

Some people see all cases of the death penalty as wrong. Making no distinction to the rationales to the penalty in places like Iran or N Korea and places like the US.

...

Consequences. It makes you wonder how many unconscious steps and rationales people have that influence their positions.
...
.

Thanks for adding some clarity and it does make sense, but then are you not kinda travelling down the "hate crime" path? That is not a path I am willing to take. When making decisions about death penalty laws I have to side on the objective and not the subjective.

[added] Oh and Wonderment...how about some clarity from you?

Wonderment
10-16-2009, 08:41 PM
Also, obvious to most I hope, I was not comparing the actual acts but the numbers... and like you, I think, showing how ludicrous it is for the left to be worrying about a death penalty here, while ignoring (or in Wonderment's case, advocating for) murders without a trial in countries not a part of his list.


Whatfur, Please refrain from making up stupid and hysterical lies about me. That crosses the line from free speech to libel.

Wonderment
10-16-2009, 08:46 PM
More detail on the 2008 numbers (http://www.amnestyusa.org/death-penalty/international-death-penalty/death-penalty-statistics/page.do?id=1011348), country by country.

China clearly leads the pack. Also, the death penalty is on the decline in the USA (for several reasons I won't go into here, including of course the tireless efforts of abolition activists). This year's DP numbers were the lowest in the US since 1995.

Whatfur
10-16-2009, 09:48 PM
More detail on the 2008 numbers (http://www.amnestyusa.org/death-penalty/international-death-penalty/death-penalty-statistics/page.do?id=1011348), country by country.

China clearly leads the pack. Also, the death penalty is on the decline in the USA (for several reasons I won't go into here, including of course the tireless efforts of abolition activists). This year's DP numbers were the lowest in the US since 1995.
See what I mean Jon? I do have to give him credit for facing up to being busted although he does so much like his buddy Brendan...with clear hopes that nobody bothers to look past the half-assed admission about China...but sorry I am compelled to save others the extra work.

The numbers: China (at least 1,718), Iran (at least 346), Saudi Arabia (at least 102), USA (37), Pakistan (at least 36)

(gotta love the "at least" parts too)

OMG, Wonderment you are a piece of work. Sorry buddy, but to include the USA in your 93% generalization is not only misleading but unseemly so.

But yeah "China clearly leads the pack" with executions in the USA accounting for less that .016 of the world total. That reads a little differently...don't ya think?

Whatfur
10-16-2009, 10:07 PM
Whatfur, Please refrain from making up stupid and hysterical lies about me. That crosses the line from free speech to libel.

I am not sure one can libel a cartoon character.

Do you or do you not advocate for the removal of all foreign troops from Afghanistan while accepting and allowing the Taliban to retake control?

The Taliban are killing civilians daily and were doing so even before 9/11. You can deny directly advocating murder, but you would not be able to deny advocating the enabling of murderers.

[added] from Canada (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/if-the-taliban-win-there-goes-the-neighbourhood/article1325203/)

Wonderment
10-17-2009, 03:17 AM
You can deny directly advocating murder,...

So since directly advocating murder is what you accused me of, are you now conceding that what you said originally was -- as I noted -- an idiotic hysterical lie?

By "you can deny" do you really mean, "I apologize for my idiotic, hysterical lie"?

Or do you just mean, "I don't care that you busted me in my idiotic, hysterical lie; I'll now go on to pretend it never happened, doesn't matter, and/or I'll switch to some less outrageous, but still nonsensical claim"?

JonIrenicus
10-17-2009, 07:15 AM
Thanks for adding some clarity and it does make sense, but then are you not kinda travelling down the "hate crime" path? That is not a path I am willing to take. When making decisions about death penalty laws I have to side on the objective and not the subjective.

[added] Oh and Wonderment...how about some clarity from you?

I am, sort of, but then not really.

Maybe it can be couched in sort of intent instead of motive way.

Hate crimes tend to focus heavily on motive.


Person A committed X murder because he did not like the victims race.

Person B committed Y murder because he was upset at being dumped.


The hate crime advocate would be more likely to press for stiffer penalties for person A due to the racial component, there the motivation was the distinction not the intent.


I do NOT want to go down the path of determining penalties/guilt based on motivation. Intent is enough, and should be all we use to judge the guilt or innocence of the crime itself.

The penalty however lends itself to factors beyond mere intent, though not necessarily motivation.


I think classifying certain murderers as worse than others though can fit in a purely intent based framework. We already have degrees of murder, and allowing some consideration to the redemptive quality of the perpetrators is not focused on the motives of their actions.

That redemptive quality is the main factor (If I were King) of determining whether or not to put someone to death.

And so when I see a response from Van Goghs murderer to his family in the form of


At the trial Bouyeri expressed no remorse for the murder he admitted to having done, saying to the victim's mother: "I donít feel your pain. I donít have any sympathy for you. I canít feel for you because I think youíre a non-believer." [6] and that he would have done it again. Bouyeri also argued that "in the fight of the believers against the infidels violence is approved by the prophet Muhammad"


The last sliver of humanity and decency, which I give all people the benefit of the doubt of having, evaporates. And I have NO problem allowing the world to be rid of such people.

Whatfur
10-17-2009, 08:22 AM
...The last sliver of humanity and decency, which I give all people the benefit of the doubt of having, evaporates. And I have NO problem allowing the world to be rid of such people.

I can agree then with additional "degrees" based maybe on the heinousness of the act further delineating who gets put to death, but I think you would be hard pressed to get a degree added for the lack of remorse however.

...and speaking of lack of remorse...let me go address Wonder Boy.

Whatfur
10-17-2009, 08:32 AM
So since directly advocating murder is what you accused me of, are you now conceding that what you said originally was -- as I noted -- an idiotic hysterical lie?

By "you can deny" do you really mean, "I apologize for my idiotic, hysterical lie"?

Or do you just mean, "I don't care that you busted me in my idiotic, hysterical lie; I'll now go on to pretend it never happened, doesn't matter, and/or I'll switch to some less outrageous, but still nonsensical claim"?


Who is sounding hysterical here? ...u funny... Can I suggest a Midol?

Tell you what... as soon as you tell us how my premise is wrong I will apologize for my logical, reasoned claim. Until then I guess you will have to live hysterically with your own outrageous, nonsensical, and idiotic choices.

claymisher
10-17-2009, 11:34 AM
So since directly advocating murder is what you accused me of, are you now conceding that what you said originally was -- as I noted -- an idiotic hysterical lie?

By "you can deny" do you really mean, "I apologize for my idiotic, hysterical lie"?

Or do you just mean, "I don't care that you busted me in my idiotic, hysterical lie; I'll now go on to pretend it never happened, doesn't matter, and/or I'll switch to some less outrageous, but still nonsensical claim"?

What's that saying? Never try to teach a pig how to sing. It only wastes your time and annoys the pig?

bjkeefe
10-17-2009, 11:44 AM
What's that saying? Never try to teach a pig how to sing. It only wastes your time and annoys the pig?

Or something (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/q137450.html) like that.

TwinSwords
10-17-2009, 12:42 PM
Or something (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/q137450.html) like that.

I like claymisher's version. ;-D

Whatfur
10-17-2009, 12:53 PM
What's that saying? Never try to teach a pig how to sing. It only wastes your time and annoys the pig?

Sorry to have annoyed you.

[added] Sorry to have annoyed all of you. I am sure Wonder Boy appreciated you running to his defense in his losing battle. Next time I suggest you bring some actual weapons and send men.

TwinSwords
10-17-2009, 12:59 PM
Sorry to have annoyed you.

[added] Sorry to have annoyed all of you. I am sure Wonder Boy appreciated you running to his defense in his losing battle. Next time I suggest you bring some actual weapons and send men.

Wonderment doesn't need anyone's help.

bjkeefe
10-17-2009, 01:16 PM
I like claymisher's version. ;-D

I think they both apply, and so there is no need to choose. (I wasn't offering a correction -- as far as I know, clay's version is a separate quote. It's just that yesterday, I happened across the GBS line, so it was on my mind.)

bjkeefe
10-17-2009, 01:18 PM
Sorry to have annoyed all of you.

New world record for insincerity.

bjkeefe
10-17-2009, 01:18 PM
... and send men.

I do love how your closeted longings keep leaking out, though.

TwinSwords
10-17-2009, 02:17 PM
I think they both apply, and so there is no need to choose. (I wasn't offering a correction -- as far as I know, clay's version is a separate quote. It's just that yesterday, I happened across the GBS line, so it was on my mind.)

Oh, I know. I wasn't trying to be argumentative. I know someone who uses the "wrestle with a pig" version all the time, but I never heard Clay's version before. I just thought the image of teaching a pig to sing was funny. :-)

graz
10-17-2009, 03:11 PM
And of course, either way whatfur is pigheaded, loves to revel in muck and is a member of the other white meat club... Though he's also a chickenhawk. Either way, white meat preferred.

bjkeefe
10-17-2009, 06:30 PM
Obviously he didn't garner much of that from the three stooges... you, the snitch, and the bitch.

Seems to be making you whimper, which is all this bitch was after.

Wonderment
10-20-2009, 01:48 AM
Some interesting numbers on the US in this CNN article (http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/20/study-states-cant-afford-death-penalty/)


Florida, where two men have been put to death this year, spends an average of $24 million per execution.

popcorn_karate
10-20-2009, 04:22 PM
And of those 5, the US has it most right. Killing the people who actually deserve to die. But then to believe that one would have to have the capacity to think that not all human life was sacred, in and of itself.

I wonder if you believe this, or you just like to beat straw men for a good time?

I oppose the death penalty because i KNOW for an absolute fact that the government makes mistakes. This strange notion that the govt is not infallible seems only to reside on the Liberal side of the political spectrum, however. Conservatives like you, love putting the power of life and death into the hands of the government because you trust that the government is god-like, right?

See as a liberal, I distrust government. I think there are crooked judges, DAs and cops. I think people have been known to lie under oath, and even misidentify people on accident.


This means that under a death penalty imposed by the government there will be innocent people put to death. This brings me to another bed-rock liberal principle that conservatives do not understand - unintended consequences. Sometimes people trying to good (punish the bad guys) will accidentally do bad (punish an innocent).

So, in summation, two ideas i think conservatives should try to understand and apply:
1) distrust of government
2) the rule of unintended consequences

but, you might feel all dirty and liberal if you start thinking that way... so be careful.