|
Post by skyloom on Aug 20, 2006 9:09:54 GMT -5
It is not hatred that motivates me to decide to be a pro dp supporter, or revenge is neither a motive. The reason why I support the deathpenalty is that I see it as as the just punishment for deliberately taking a human life. You see you cannot bring back a murder victim from the dead. You all know this of course, but it seems not that important. You complain that the Dp in the USA is arbitrarily applied, but please stop and ask what the hell is murder. You complain that the state is violating the human rights of the murderer by executing him when all what is happening is that he is just paying the price for his evil actions. You demand the right of a fair trial for a murderer, but you forget that the murderer denied his victim all these rights plus more. You forget that those rights are there becuase yes people are wrongly accused, it is the standard of this state that people are given the right to speak in their defence and demand that the prosecution prove their case. Yet the victim generally had no right to beg for mercy for his or her life. You say that capital punishment is not revenge, yet in the same post you say that the victim cannot come back from the dead. What is that but revenge?
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Aug 20, 2006 13:40:54 GMT -5
it's definately a "garbage disposal tool". Think about it. Anyone who rapes and kills a child is f*cking sick in the head. Therefore since they are mentally challenged they are not suitable to execute. What about the executives of a corporation whose faulty product kills over 80 children, and who decide to pay compensation and pay for silence rather than pay to fix it? They are never prosecuted and are welcome at church and in all social groups. Is this justice? The mentally ill who kill one child are executed. Those who kill many for profit are rewarded. A strange game you play.
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Aug 20, 2006 15:15:04 GMT -5
Therefore since they are mentally challenged they are not suitable to execute. What about the executives of a corporation whose faulty product kills over 80 children, and who decide to pay compensation and pay for silence rather than pay to fix it? They are never prosecuted and are welcome at church and in all social groups. Is this justice? The mentally ill who kill one child are executed. Those who kill many for profit are rewarded. A strange game you play. I think they (the above CEOs) are guilty of mass murder and it's long past time for them to be treated that way. You have a good insight on these criminals... all they care about is their social status and their usually extravagant lifestyle. I oppose capital punishment totally, but I wouldn't be too upset if a few of these kinds of murderers were sentenced to life without possibility of parole and if the state took whatever they own to apply to some restitution for their victims. I also think that it's a tricky call for someone who is mentally ill. Much depends on the specific mental illness, and it seems that doctors, psychiatrists, and etc. have a hard time agreeing about specific cases. Again, though, take capital punishment off the table and I think it will be much clearer what to do about them.
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Aug 20, 2006 15:23:27 GMT -5
Therefore since they are mentally challenged they are not suitable to execute. What about the executives of a corporation whose faulty product kills over 80 children, and who decide to pay compensation and pay for silence rather than pay to fix it? They are never prosecuted and are welcome at church and in all social groups. Is this justice? The mentally ill who kill one child are executed. Those who kill many for profit are rewarded. A strange game you play. I think they (the above CEOs) are guilty of mass murder and it's long past time for them to be treated that way. You have a good insight on these criminals... all they care about is their social status and their usually extravagant lifestyle. I oppose capital punishment totally, but I wouldn't be too upset if a few of these kinds of murderers were sentenced to life without possibility of parole and if the state took whatever they own to apply to some restitution for their victims. I also think that it's a tricky call for someone who is mentally ill. Much depends on the specific mental illness, and it seems that doctors, psychiatrists, and etc. have a hard time agreeing about specific cases. Again, though, take capital punishment off the table and I think it will be much clearer what to do about them.
|
|
|
Post by legallybrunette on Aug 21, 2006 13:37:26 GMT -5
I agree - how does one measure culpability when mens rea may be interfered with as a consequence of derangement. One could go one further and suggest that all acts of crime depriving another of their life, constitutes some form of derangement. It follows therefore that all criminals are nuts!! On that basis, none of them should be subject to a sentence of death. I agree also that it is more about revenge. Although I don't agree with DP, I do find myself wishing I could exact untold tortures upon the persons of child killers when I get emotionally wound up over particularly heinous crimes. Doesn't bring the child back or undo the harm suffered by the victim but just gives me and certain vengeful portions of society, a personal sense of satisfaction. Not right really, is it
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Aug 21, 2006 13:55:55 GMT -5
Hey, I just sent you a personal message, quick, check it out-Leg.Brunette
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Aug 21, 2006 19:27:25 GMT -5
I think they (the above CEOs) are guilty of mass murder and it's long past time for them to be treated that way. You have a good insight on these criminals... all they care about is their social status and their usually extravagant lifestyle. I oppose capital punishment totally, but I wouldn't be too upset if a few of these kinds of murderers were sentenced to life without possibility of parole and if the state took whatever they own to apply to some restitution for their victims. I also think that it's a tricky call for someone who is mentally ill. Much depends on the specific mental illness, and it seems that doctors, psychiatrists, and etc. have a hard time agreeing about specific cases. Again, though, take capital punishment off the table and I think it will be much clearer what to do about them. They just reran the story of the Sampoong Department Store collapse. The owner cut corners in a vicious and totally greedy way and wound up killing 501 people. He got 10 years and I don't think he served it all due to ill health. 10 years for killing 501 people! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampoong_Department_Store_collapse
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Aug 22, 2006 8:22:48 GMT -5
I agree - how does one measure culpability when mens rea may be interfered with as a consequence of derangement. One could go one further and suggest that all acts of crime depriving another of their life, constitutes some form of derangement. It follows therefore that all criminals are nuts!! On that basis, none of them should be subject to a sentence of death. Our Public Broadcasting System in the U.S. has a TV series called "Frontline." They did a program on "The New Asylums." You can get to it online at: www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/asylums/view/The information about the program says that: Fewer than 55,000 Americans currently receive treatment in psychiatric hospitals. Meanwhile, almost 10 times that number -- nearly 500,000 -- mentally ill men and women are serving time in U.S. jails and prisons. As sheriffs and prison wardens become the unexpected and often ill-equipped caretakers of this burgeoning population, they raise a troubling new concern: Have America's jails and prisons become its new asylums? I hope you have a chance to look at the program and read through some of the text available at the site. I don't know about all criminals as mentally deranged, but for sure a little intervention before they became criminals couldn't hurt. Too many people are falling through the cracks. We in the U.S. have this sense of individualism, believing that any individual can succeed in life if s/he has "character and determination." There's a place for personal responsibility, but sometimes, I think also "it takes a village."
|
|
|
Post by legallybrunette on Aug 22, 2006 8:37:13 GMT -5
Yes, I certainly shall look up the site you refer to. There was a documentary shown on tv here wherein they researched the possibility that those who committed violent crime, had greater areas of a specific chemical brain matter in proportion to a non criminal's brain. Consequently, it was suggested that there was little one could do to curb the inevitable actions of said criminal, even had intervention taken place early in that individual's life. This might explain why an otherwise totally normal person then goes on to commit a wholly uncharacteristic crime such as killing his or her entire family or a complete stranger. I rather doubt that any State would see fit to spend money either researching this possibility further or indeed scanning those standing accused of murder, in order to establish whether they had an inherent brain abnormality or not!! There is little funding going into mental support in England either ; the so called 'care in the community' scheme was simply a ruse for opening up untold numbers of asylums and throwing the residents out on the street to fend for themselves and cause havoc when they lost control. There have been a number of high profile murders committed over here as a consequence of this cost cutting measure.
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Aug 23, 2006 19:29:01 GMT -5
There was a documentary shown on tv here wherein they researched the possibility that those who committed violent crime, had greater areas of a specific chemical brain matter in proportion to a non criminal's brain. Consequently, it was suggested that there was little one could do to curb the inevitable actions of said criminal, even had intervention taken place early in that individual's life. In the U.S. the doctors tell us that an imbalance of brain chemistry can cause depression... so there are medicines they give that will restore the balance (supposedly!). If this is the case with every one of those who commit crimes, then perhaps there will be a medicine? There is also research that seems to indicate that any brain is not fully developed until the individual is, on average, in the mid-twenties, and the area that is not fully developed is the area that controls impulsive behavior. Statistics also tell us that violent crimes are likely committed by young males under the age of thirty. I don't suppose we can lock kids up until they are thirty... although having raised three to adulthood, there were times when it didn't seem like a bad idea... but if it's true that the brain development in that one area lags behind a bit then it's also true that culpability is also a bit diminished for these individuals. Ah, yes! We had that with Reagan. I do think it's important for the individual to be in the least restrictive environment in which s/he is able to function, but when you have groups of people who have always lived in a limited environment... and many were placed in institutions almost at birth... when are they supposed to learn the skills necessary to function on their own? We had an institution in Pennsylvania that was closed to save costs. The people weren't inherently violent, but they were confused on their own and sometimes became agitated when they were confused or frightened. The small towns into which they were placed had good folks who looked out for these people as much as they could, but sadly, many of the former residents simply died from lack of being able to take care of themselves. One I know about died by choking on toilet paper, which she ate. In the institution, someone had watched her in the toilet. Sometimes the politicians just do not think.
|
|
|
Post by legallybrunette on Aug 24, 2006 7:14:19 GMT -5
That is terrible. I recall that many years ago when I was still in training and barely out of my teens, I had to go to a very old Victorian asylum to take instructions from a schizophrenic resident, in relation an alleged theft of personal items. Residents were allowed to roam about but under some supervision and there were staff all around. I was scared witless and desperately needed a change of underwear even before I had stepped through the front doors of the place. I had been warned to not catch anyone's eye if I could help it until the director came down to meet me as the residents whilst generally harmless, were largely unpredictable and if their meds had not been taken, could turn on one. Getting past the muttering residents and their hard glass eyed stares was a doddle, compared to the confrontation I had with the 'client' resident who was in a bad way that particular day and saw me as the enemy. I tried to persuade him to sign a form and give me clear instructions but he just kept yelling and thrashing about. He meant no harm but it was scary. Worse still, the director had LOCKED me in with him as per their regulations. Gulp. Those were the longest 15 minutes of my life. I could hear blood curdling screams echoing down the hallways and a great deal of moaning. There was excrement and what looked to be dried blood on the walls. It is tragic that people can be in this state but far greater a tragedy as you say, that they are left to their own devices in a largely unfamiliar environment. I bet if the politicians worldwide, had to dump their deranged or even slightly disturbed relations out on the streets like that, without proper supervision and support and care, they would think twice about doing it to the general public. I notice no current leader's son or daughter is fighting on the front in foreign lands nor facing social injustice of any kind meted out to the rest of the populations of their countries. What 's good for us, should be good for them surely.
|
|