Like this, but brown.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I don't know. If the family/victim doesn't want it, I'm all for just holding the offender for life without parole.
But if one of them does, if they would just feel a little bit of closure to think, "You know what, that my daughter/wife/brother will never experience a moment of joy again, but at least the guy who killed him/her never will either," then I'm for the option being there.
Much to my BFF's wife's chagrin, No Pants 2013 became No Pants 2010's at his house.
A procrastination in of itself
Want is not the same as "actually benefit from".
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good.
Like this, but brown.
I'm not terribly concerned that the murderer might have someone be racist against him. There's a very simple way to avoid that racist being able to control whether you live or die - don't murder.
I see it as somewhat similar to the concept that a racist woman who has sex with every white guy she meets but calls it rape if a black guy has sex with her without the consent that she's only withholding because he's black. And she's right, and it doesn't matter that the court will enforce her racism by saying whatever her reason for non-consent, she didn't consent.
Likewise, in this scenario, the court would say whatever the reason the family wants the offender dead, they want the offender dead.
The two cases are not equivalent, I'm just trying to show you what I'm thinking with a more relatable example.
Much to my BFF's wife's chagrin, No Pants 2013 became No Pants 2010's at his house.
In the pursuit of great, we failed to do good.
Nah, you're right. If your premise is that the victim/their relatives have the hand of the offender in their hands from the beginning it doesn't matter if he is saved or condemned by their religion,ideology,racism or psychological illneses. The problem with the premise is that you take away the right to kill from the state and give it to private persons. Unlike giving sexual consent, having the power to decide over life and death shouldn't be in the hands of individual people at all.
Like this, but brown.
My default would be to execute those who have committed such crimes, but if the victim('s family) says, "It would actually make me feel worse to have them killed in my name," or something similar, then I would hope the state could hold back for the sake of the wronged party. That's why I would let it be the decision of the victim('s family).
Much to my BFF's wife's chagrin, No Pants 2013 became No Pants 2010's at his house.
I must ask does anyone here know about the Julian Gallows? Not that I support hanging but they did have an interesting concept behind it.
Some stuff happen in' in Indonesia.
Professional Forum Ninja
The counter-argument I'd use against the "state murder" argument is that a fine isn't theft. Nor is arrest kidnapping. Nor are police (necessarily) vigilantes. Therefore, it logically follows that a legal execution by a legitimate authority isn't the same as murder.
"Any campaign world where an orc samurai can leap off a landcruiser to fight a herd of Bulbasaurs will always have my vote of confidence"
A procrastination in of itself
Well duh, put jut because it's not murder doesn't make it right or a good idea.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
As Silas just stated though, that doesn't make it morally right. Or make it a good idea for that matter.
By the way, I heard a while ago, that there was a study done in one of the states that not only has executions but broadcasts them on TV (Nevada maybe?). According to what I read, murder rates actually spiked after each broadcast because the government was essentially sending the message that killing people was an acceptable way to solve your problems.
Queen of Good Things, Honest
I believe it.
Regardless of where one stands on the matter of the death penalty, turning the act of killing a person into entertainment only encourages people to do more of it. For reference, see gladiatorial games, witch burnings, and the entire French Revolution.
Death is not a sporting event.
edited 11th Mar '15 1:00:04 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.
The Mod with the Migraine
No such thing as a humane execution
.
Though some states kept the firing squad and hanging, electrocution remained the predominant method of state execution for much of the 20th century. After the court upheld capital punishment in 1976, lethal injection was eventually adopted in most states, yet again, in an effort to find a more "humane" way to carry out death sentences. Because some risk of pain is inherent in any method of execution, the court has held time and again "that the Constitution does not require the avoidance of all risk of pain," Alito wrote. "Holding that the Eighth Amendment demands the elimination of essentially all risk of pain would effectively outlaw the death penalty altogether."
"Every time someone introduces a new method of execution, they make the same argument: 'Trust me. It will be quick. It will be painless. It is the most humane alternative,'" said Robert Dunham, director of the Death Penalty Information Center. "They have a political or commercial interest in the outcome. And they haven't done any real medical or scientific research to back up their claims. And in every instance, sooner or later, something they didn't anticipate goes wrong."
"From a technical point of view, yes, it's possible to make an execution quick and as painless as possible, if that's what you're trained to do," said medical ethicist Dr. Daniel P. Sulmasy, associate director of the University of Chicago's Mac Lean Center for Clinical Medical Ethics. From an ethical perspective, however, "it is always immoral and inhumane to participate in an execution, even if it's done painlessly," he said. "Our job is to be life-affirming, and participating in an execution is inconsistent with that mission because it ends up making us agents of the state in killing people."
Each method comes with its own set of risks, Dr. Joel B. Zivot, assistant professor of anesthesiology and surgery with Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta. But lethal injection does the best job of creating the "illusion" of a peaceful execution by rendering the inmate unconscious with a sedative before delivering the drugs that paralyze and stop the heart. "Since we cannot ask the person now dead if the method was cruel or painless, the only way to tell is based on the way it appears to observers," Zivot said. "If we took away the sedative I expect we would see the real face of execution, the consequence of paralysis and suffocation, and I imagine we would observe that experience to be cruel."
A 2006 article in the New England Journal of Medicine addressed why some physicians participate in executions. Four physicians and a nurse, speaking under the condition of anonymity, said they saw it as an extension of their obligation to patients to ensure the process went as smoothly as possible. "It was my responsibility to make sure that everything be done in a way that was professional and respectful to the inmate as a human being," a nurse said. "If this is to be done correctly, if it is to be done at all, then I am the person to do it."
<snip>
Oklahoma even has a backup [method of execution], just in case. While the Supreme Court case was pending, Gov. Mary Fallin signed a bill that would allow the state to perform executions with nitrogen gas if lethal injection is ruled unconstitutional or becomes unavailable. While the medical community has voiced concerns about the method, at least one group thinks the Sooner State might be onto something. Philip Nitschke, director of right-to-die group, Exit International, said the increasing difficulty in obtaining pentobarbital has prompted him to consider gas as an alternative. He is currently working on a self-activated "destiny machine" that will deliver a combination of nitrogen and carbon monoxide through nasal prongs to instigate hypoxia.
Even if you take out the emotional or philosophical questions about capital punishment, the potential for operator error remains, said Fordham University School of Law Professor Deborah W. Denno. "This has always been the problem throughout history: the people performing the executions," she said. "Why? We don't train people to be executioners." The closest thing America has to trained executioners are shooters or marksmen, theoretically making a firing squad the best option for successful outcomes, she said. But who wants to witness a firing squad? "People are horrified by firing squads because they look so bad, or they get associated with authoritarian regimes," she said. "Utah is the only [state] that has it and they've been mocked endlessly each time."
Guillotines are subject to the same perception problems. "When there's an ISIS beheading, no one ever says 'at least they didn't suffer,'" said Austin Sarat, professor of jurisprudence and political science and associate dean of faculty at Amherst College. Sarat analyzed 8,776 executions performed in the United States between 1900 and 2010 for his book, "Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and America's Death Penalty." He came up with a botched rate of 3.15%, or 276 executions. The method with the highest rate of error based on his research? Lethal injection, he said. The lowest? The electric chair.
note
That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
Queen of Good Things, Honest
See, that's what I've been saying. There is no way to humanely kill someone because putting someone to death against their will is, by definition, inhumane. We try too hard to have our cake and eat it too.
- If you want to have a death penalty in your justice system, might as well do it affordably. No reason to spend thousands of dollars on the execution method just so you can lie to yourself and go, "Well, I have the moral high ground. I'm a benevolent killer. The people I put to death can take comfort in how much money I spent to make their death enjoyable." End of the day, you're still a killer. The, "I'm not really a killer because I made the victim comfortable," argument wouldn't fly in the defendant's chair, it shouldn't fly in the execution chamber.
- If you want to have humane sentencing, maybe the death penalty is not for you.
A nice butterfly
Maybe the opposite of the death penalty should be an option. Complete isolation. Kept alive as long as possible. No option to get out.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Queen of Good Things, Honest
Then, when you're good and deranged and frothing-at-the-mouth insane, the CIA sneaks you into countries we don't like and lets you go do whatever you want?
NEWS OF THE HOUR: The United States has been accused of manufacturing and weaponizing mentally ill civilians for use on foreign soil. While no international weapons bans on crazy people exist at this time, the U.N. has politely asked them to please stop doing that because it's creepy and sort of evil.
edited 14th Aug '15 7:47:25 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.
A nice butterfly
I was thinking just chuck them there and return to your Mario Kart game instead of maliciously sending them to be someone elses problem.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Queen of Good Things, Honest
But maliciously sending people to be someone else's problem is a time-honored tradition in justice systems! It used to be called banishment before we ran out of places to banish people to 'cause every ounce of the Earth had a flag on it.
Frankly, I think that's a contributing factor in death's popularity. Sometimes we just want someone to go away forever but we can't just ship them off to go die in Australia because there's a country there now. Immediately outside every border is someone else's border.
edited 14th Aug '15 7:53:44 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.
A nice butterfly
Yeah but we didnt have Mario Kart then. Or the internet.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Queen of Good Things, Honest
New plan! We exile people to Mars. It could be the beginning of plans to colonize Mars using people who are expendable! Two birds, one stone! There is no possible flaw in this.
NEWS OF THE HOUR: United States prison system so overcrowded that the President approves spending billions of dollars to shoot criminals into space. American deficit rises substantially. When criticized for this new policy, President Drake jerked his thumb in what he thought was the direction of Dallas but was, in fact, North and commented, "Hey, if you want to come say that to my face, I've got a rocket with your name on it."
edited 14th Aug '15 7:56:48 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.
A nice butterfly
Stop trying to honor criminals and let me just psychologically torture them, gosh. You goody two shoes.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Jupiterian Local
In my opinion, that isn't such a bad idea. Mars seems to be a more hospitable version of Australia anyway.
Killing people is inhumane; that's why murderers are punished - by being killed, in some cases. Which seems a bit hypocritical, if you ask me. It's hard to sell the whole "killing is wrong" to people when the state's doing that itself.
edited 14th Aug '15 5:49:14 PM by DrunkenNordmann
Welcome to Estalia, gentlemen.
Question, have any studies been done showing if it actually does help the families of victims to see the perpetrators executed? Does it actually help? Or does it just feed into their anger and rage?
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran