[quote]orion wrote:
Excuse me, but is your argument that since the US is not able to guarantee the safety of her prisoners the same incompetent justices system should have the power to kill people?[/quote]
How exactly does competence in running a prison translate into competence in prosecuting cases?
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
This may be of interest: the following are all of the countries in which capital punishment is currently legal. With only a few notable exceptions, they are all third-world countries.
Afghanistan
Algeria
Antigua and Barbuda
The Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Benin
Botswana
Brunei
Burkina Faso
Burundi
Cameroon
Central African Republic
Chad
China
Comoros
Congo, Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Republic of the
Cuba
Dominica
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Ghana
Guatemala
Guinea
Guyana
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Lebanon
Lesotho
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Mauritania
Mongolia
Morocco
Myanmar
Nauru
Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Oman
Pakistan
Papua New Guinea
Qatar
Russian Federation
Rwanda
Saint Kitts and Nevis, Federation of
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Somalia
South Korea
Swaziland
Syria
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
United States of America
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
[/quote]
Interesting yes; persuasive, no.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
This may be of interest: the following are all of the countries in which capital punishment is currently legal. …Japan
…
I had no idea it was legal in Japan. Is it employed? What method?
I think its beheading with a true Samurai sword from the Kill Bill movies.
[/quote]
That is AWESOME!
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
This may be of interest: the following are all of the countries in which capital punishment is currently legal. …Japan
…
I had no idea it was legal in Japan. Is it employed? What method?
I think its beheading with a true Samurai sword from the Kill Bill movies.
That is AWESOME![/quote]
I think it’s actually a good old fashioned hanging.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
No, BB, the fact that the prison system isn’t perfect (being as its not designed to be a sentence of beatings and rapes, and is actually in many ways designed to prevent them) does not make a life sentence in jail “de facto” the same as a sentence of beatings and rapes. [/quote]
Then they’re not designed very well… just relating to sexual violence:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/dcprea03.htm
So, are you arguing against my point that a life sentence in prison will entail rapes and beatings for child molesters? And most likely at unpredictable intervals, which is worse from a psychological perspective than some scheduled atrocities?
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Now, we could get into the issue of if prisons need to get better at the job of preventing said beatings and rapes, but that sounds like a path littered with allegations of me being a “pedophile supporter” or “pedophile sympathetic” or other such nonsense. [/quote]
Not really - that would be a productive conversation, particularly because pedophiles aren’t the only ones subject to rapes and beatings inside prisons.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
You can call it “high-horse” morality, but my point remains: there are certain lines we as a society should not cross, regardless of what anyone does. Yes, that means anyone, no matter what they do or to who.
[/quote]
My point is that your point is incorrect, or at best immaterial, because society crosses the line in practice already.
And my second point is that the death penalty may just be morally superior to a sentence to a life of beatings and rapes.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
orion wrote:
Excuse me, but is your argument that since the US is not able to guarantee the safety of her prisoners the same incompetent justices system should have the power to kill people?
How exactly does competence in running a prison translate into competence in prosecuting cases?
[/quote]
It is more about the idea that the system cannot guarantee there safety killing them is not so bad.
Not that run of the mill government incompetency would not make an excellent point against the death penalty.
That wasn’t my point though. We are comparing two different punishments administered by the government. If an explicit punishment of rapes and beatings is worse than a death sentence, then a punishment that results in a lifetime of rapes and beatings might also be worse than the death sentence.
[quote]conner wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
This may be of interest: the following are all of the countries in which capital punishment is currently legal. …Japan
…
I had no idea it was legal in Japan. Is it employed? What method?
I think its beheading with a true Samurai sword from the Kill Bill movies.
That is AWESOME!
I think it’s actually a good old fashioned hanging.[/quote]
You’re right.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Interesting yes; persuasive, no.[/quote]
That doesn’t bother me, my intent wasn’t to persuade. I just found it funny.
[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
No, BB, the fact that the prison system isn’t perfect (being as its not designed to be a sentence of beatings and rapes, and is actually in many ways designed to prevent them) does not make a life sentence in jail “de facto” the same as a sentence of beatings and rapes.
Then they’re not designed very well… just relating to sexual violence:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/dcprea03.htm
So, are you arguing against my point that a life sentence in prison will entail rapes and beatings for child molesters? And most likely at unpredictable intervals, which is worse from a psychological perspective than some scheduled atrocities?
[/quote]
I’m arguing that it shouldnt, and if it does the prisons should get better at preventing them.
Fine: Prisons should get better at preventing violence among inmates.
My point, that the government should never be allowed to sentence someone to cruel and unusual punishment is incorrect. Are you serious?
[quote]
And my second point is that the death penalty may just be morally superior to a sentence to a life of beatings and rapes.[/quote]
Fine, then advocate the death penatly. Thats STILL not advocating “sentences of beatings and rapes”, which is what I was speaking against.
[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
Interesting yes; persuasive, no.
Varqanir wrote:
That doesn’t bother me, my intent wasn’t to persuade. I just found it funny.[/quote]
I figured that was the case - just pointing it out for the benefit of others…
[quote]
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
No, BB, the fact that the prison system isn’t perfect (being as its not designed to be a sentence of beatings and rapes, and is actually in many ways designed to prevent them) does not make a life sentence in jail “de facto” the same as a sentence of beatings and rapes.
BostonBarrister wrote:
Then they’re not designed very well… just relating to sexual violence:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/dcprea03.htm
So, are you arguing against my point that a life sentence in prison will entail rapes and beatings for child molesters? And most likely at unpredictable intervals, which is worse from a psychological perspective than some scheduled atrocities?
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
I’m arguing that it shouldnt, and if it does the prisons should get better at preventing them. [/quote]
I quite agree. Now if we could just get all of the energy focused on the abolition of the death penalty focused on improvement of prisons, we might get somewhere.
It’s particularly troubling w/r/t non-violent offenders - and even more troubling w/r/t juvenile offenders. Prisons currently are animal holding pens.
Which isn’t to say that they should be pleasant, but is to say the for those that will be released on society again, it shouldn’t make them worse (mentally disturbed, hardened, more criminal, etc.). Prison isn’t for rehab, because rehab mostly doesn’t work, but it shouldn’t make people worse.
[quote]
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Now, we could get into the issue of if prisons need to get better at the job of preventing said beatings and rapes, but that sounds like a path littered with allegations of me being a “pedophile supporter” or “pedophile sympathetic” or other such nonsense.
BostonBarrister wrote:
Not really - that would be a productive conversation, particularly because pedophiles aren’t the only ones subject to rapes and beatings inside prisons.
CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Fine: Prisons should get better at preventing violence among inmates.[/quote]
Agreed. People should get the penalties handed down by juries.
Good: I’m advocating the death penalty.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
conner wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
This may be of interest: the following are all of the countries in which capital punishment is currently legal. …Japan
…
I had no idea it was legal in Japan. Is it employed? What method?
I think its beheading with a true Samurai sword from the Kill Bill movies.
That is AWESOME!
I think it’s actually a good old fashioned hanging.
You’re right.
[/quote]
Wasn’t it Lucy Liu who beheads the Yakuza crime lord in Kill Bill? Could real Samurai behead someone so easily?
Anyway, if its proven beyond a reasonable doubt that some person committed some heinous crime (like John Cooey or that guy in Georgia), why not have some expert swordsman cut off his head? Hell, I’d bet tickets could be sold to that.
I also like how the Chinese deal with shitbags — march them into a stadium with a sign around their necks saying what they did, with a firing squad waiting. Sell tickets to defray expenses.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
…
[/quote]
I actually agree with you. If you must execute people (which I oppose), do it publicly. That multiplies the deterring effect of the execution.
I don’t know about the Samurai sword though. It’s quite messy and desecrates the body. What would be fun is hanging the person, but the trap be opened through an elaborate mechanism that requires participation of the crowd.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
…
I actually agree with you. If you must execute people (which I oppose), do it publicly. That multiplies the deterring effect of the execution.
I don’t know about the Samurai sword though. It’s quite messy and desecrates the body. What would be fun is hanging the person, but the trap be opened through an elaborate mechanism that requires participation of the crowd.[/quote]
You completely misunderstand the purpose of public executions in the context of the European culture.
The crowds that gathered were NOT there to enjoy a show and if something went even slightly wrong you had a riot on your hands.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Wasn’t it Lucy Liu who beheads the Yakuza crime lord in Kill Bill? Could real Samurai behead someone so easily?
Anyway, if its proven beyond a reasonable doubt that some person committed some heinous crime (like John Cooey or that guy in Georgia), why not have some expert swordsman cut off his head? Hell, I’d bet tickets could be sold to that.
[/quote]
Well, the phrase “capital punishment” derives from the practice of decapitation, after all.
Japan practiced decapitation by sword until the end of the second World War. And yes, the katana is quite well suited to the task.
Switzerland beheaded criminals with a sword until 1867, although convicts were given the option of the guillotine from around 1835.
Finland, Norway, Denmark, and Sweden also practiced decapitation with either axe or sword until the late 19th century, with Sweden beheading the last criminal with an axe in 1900, and the last by guillotine in 1910.
Interestingly, the most prolific user of the guillotine in modern Europe was Nazi Germany. The German version of the guillotine, the Fallbeil, was the normal method of execution for capital crimes. Between 1933 and 1945, over forty thousand people were beheaded in Austria and Germany.
Today, the only country that actively and officially practices decapitation for capital punishment is Saudi Arabia.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Wasn’t it Lucy Liu who beheads the Yakuza crime lord in Kill Bill? Could real Samurai behead someone so easily?
Anyway, if its proven beyond a reasonable doubt that some person committed some heinous crime (like John Cooey or that guy in Georgia), why not have some expert swordsman cut off his head? Hell, I’d bet tickets could be sold to that.
Well, the phrase “capital punishment” derives from the practice of decapitation, after all.
Japan practiced decapitation by sword until the end of the second World War. And yes, the katana is quite well suited to the task.
Switzerland beheaded criminals with a sword until 1867, although convicts were given the option of the guillotine from around 1835.
Finland, Norway, Denmark, and Sweden also practiced decapitation with either axe or sword until the late 19th century, with Sweden beheading the last criminal with an axe in 1900, and the last by guillotine in 1910.
Interestingly, the most prolific user of the guillotine in modern Europe was Nazi Germany. The German version of the guillotine, the Fallbeil, was the normal method of execution for capital crimes. Between 1933 and 1945, over forty thousand people were beheaded in Austria and Germany.
Today, the only country that actively and officially practices decapitation for capital punishment is Saudi Arabia.[/quote]
Maybe if one of those sick bastards at the top of the thread had seen some scumbag’s head being hacked off, the innocent victims might be alive today.
I actually oppose the death penalty up to a certain point, but then would apply it w/o mercy. Horrible crimes against children is one such case.
I oppose the death penalty, mainly because the state so often fails to gut the right guy.
Yet, if I had to decide, I would vote for the judicial executioner and his sword as the capital punishment of choice.
Main reasons: Decapitation is quicker (if done by an expert), a lot more humane (braindeath is practically instanteous) then hanging and poisoning, stoning or whatever.
And, what is most important, a man has to kill you with his muscle. It’s not some machinery or a cowardly hidden rifleman (as in the former GDR).
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Main reasons: Decapitation is quicker (if done by an expert), a lot more humane (braindeath is practically instanteous) then hanging and poisoning, stoning or whatever.
[/quote]
Surprisingly enough, that seems not to be the case.
I wouldn’t give much about a “medical report” from the Belle Epoque. [quote]
“Next Languille’s eyes very definitely fixed themselves on mine and the pupils focused themselves. I was not, then, dealing with the sort of vague dull look without any expression, that can be observed any day in dying people to whom one speaks: I was dealing with undeniably living eyes which were looking at me.”[/quote]
This is all very moving, but it is poppycock.
Modern science tells us that the moment you sever the neck, the brain goes wild in a split second. It has trouble figuring out what’s going on and the physiological maximum of action potentials is happening, which is akin to a epileptic shock (only more violent). Strange reactions (eyelids moving, lips twitching) do happen, but higher brain functions are out of the question.
Since there is no bloodflow and the brain is rapidly consuming it’s ATP energy, the reports I read all claim that between 10 or 20 seconds there isn’t anything left the brain can consume.
So you’re unconscious pretty quick (a bit longer then one tenth of a second, then, after 15 seconds, the brain is finished). RIP.