The Capital Punishment Debate

[Bane]

Executed criminals have an extremely low recidivism rate.  

True, but it does not effectively deter others.

Cost is not even a legitmate argument.  This is Canada

I think cost is a legitimate argument, but it is of lower importance. You and Greymatters I think are correct in pointing this out. At issue are far more weighty moral arguments

How about, simply put by the venerable Wilfred Brimley, "it's the right thing to do"?  

That is not a weighty moral argument.


Edited for grammer.

 

[Bane]

              I'm not trying to exclude myself from my own critsism here; if I could quickly and easily define justice (This 'rightness' the Mr. Brimley mentions) and then using that definition of the 'just', lay out exactly how execution is damaging to society and how not executing a person is in itself just, even if they are a monster, I would.  But it's not easy to argue one way or the other without resorting to this simple notion of natural 'rightness'.  I must admit that that argument is appealing in ways, and can equally be used to back either side, but it is not persuasive nor sufficient if it is to become state policy in my opinion.  I don't have any great answers myself at the moment. 

 

[Rayman]

That would require that someone admit that the concept of rehabilitation is a joke.  It isn't very hard to spot people who have a chance at changing vs. gearboxes that are career criminals/too dangerous to be allowed out without an explosive radio collar. 

I can agree with that totally zipperhead except for one thing. If someones commited a crime that warrants say a life or a rather lengthy prison sentance, should they even be given the chance at rehabilitation?

 

[zipperhead_cop]

"Deterrence" is a paper tiger.  Nothing deters criminals.  You either want to commit crime, or you don't.  There is nothing in law that creates any real consequence for any crime, therefore there is really no reason to not be a criminal.  For regular folks, they would not want to spend time in jail, and therefore think it is a bad thing.  For the criminals, who have learned from the first second they step foot into a detention facility, it is a big game.  They generally could care less about being in jail, unless it is cutting into their crack-time.  Committing crime is like playing hockey.  You eventually end up doing some time in the penalty box, but you'll be back in the game soon enough. 
Bane, I imagine you are hung up on the idea that "human life is precious".  I don't happen to have that hang up.  IMO human life is a privilege, which should be reassessed in terms of "what have you done for anyone lately" and if things were proper, that status could be up for termination if one fails to meet a standard.  Being a useless, drug addled, society-draining cancer IMO most certainly qualifies one for elimination.  Being a child molester?  That's easy.  Night night.  Kill any innocent (not just police) in order to facilitate the crime you are committing?  Dirt nap time. 
I would love to hear why we should retain these clods within society.  And I don't want to hear "rehabilitation" because everyone who is in the system knows that doesn't work. 

I can agree with that totally zipperhead except for one thing. If someones commited a crime that warrants say a life or a rather lengthy prison sentance, should they even be given the chance at rehabilitation?

No.  I have seen countless criminals brag and laugh about the counselling and "personal development" initiatives they have undertaken in order to dazzle some judge or parole member.  It's all b*llshit. 
Here's a thought.  You got to jail, you do hard, phyically brutal labour on pain of corporal punishment.  Criminals tend to be lazy, so this would be hell for them.  If working at a real job is easier than going to jail, lo and behold you might just see some of them make the easier choice.  But I could just imagine the squall that would come out of the left:
"Oh, but that is so icky and brutal!  That would be a police state!  Bono would give us a poo poo look and we wouldn't appear in the top ten of the UN cool places to live list, eewwww gad, I don't want people to not like me"

 

[Bane]

That's a really good clear argument zipperhead.  I'm surpised more people don't agree with you. Your arguments are so persuasive, and loud. And your barely veiled personal attacks really win me over.

I happen to know a Doctor very well that counsils inmates in Kingston. She has quite a balanced and realistic opinion of the benifits and limits of rehab. So much for speaking for everyone in the system.  And we're not talking about rehab, we're talking about captial punishment.  No mention of 'appropriate length of internment' is needed. 

You don't think life is precious? Thats really sad.  I suspect you really do (solider and a cop) but are saying that to seem tougher. 

 

[Rayman]

To me his last post sounds like hes saying that some of these people who do nothing but milk the system and are nothing but trouble should be walked off the ramp...without a chute none the less. Though this thinning of the herd would probably cause a lot less problems in society though there are people who will object saying this is useless slaughter or some sort of Holocaust. As well people wouldnt care to see that it isnt like Hitlers killing of citizens and individuals upstanding or not because they belonged to an ethnic group or had a different sexual orientation. They would see one thing and one thing only-killing.

Which is what leads me to my point that while a death penalty in my opinion is barbaric, they should just put them away for life. Yes it does drain tax dollars out of me every pay cheque. That wont stop tomorow and the day after doesnt look good either. Instead of sinking money into someone sitting in a chair and asking them repeatedly "And how does that make you feel inside?" they should simply say "Listen pal, you blew it plain and simple. No chance for parole and no chance to ever leave these walls again." Have them sit there and live with that the rest of their lives. How they screwed up. They'll regret it sooner or later, hate being alive, and wish for death. If they want to end their lives sooner or later they may find a way or may not. Like the saying goes "Even hell is too good." Death is the easy way out. Theyve done whatever they have done and realize its the end of the line and death may be the only good thing to happen to them in the near future. Instead let them rot and suffer never to resurface again.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

That's a really good clear argument zipperhead.  I'm surpised more people don't agree with you. Your arguments are so persuasive, and loud. And your barely veiled personal attacks really win me over.

You're feeling attacked?  Trust me, I don't veil anything.  

I happen to know a Doctor very well that counsils inmates in Kingston. She has quite a balanced and realistic opinion of the benifits and limits of rehab. So much for speaking for everyone in the system.  And we're not talking about rehab, we're talking about captial punishment.  No mention of 'appropriate length of internment' is needed. 

Rayman asked the question on rehabilitation.  I don't presume to speak for everyone in the system, but my access to players in the system is significant.  You are relying on the information of one social worker?  

You don't think life is precious? Thats really sad.  I suspect you really do (solider and a cop) but are saying that to seem tougher. 

EAD.  I didn't say all life.  I said that at such time as you demonstrate that you are abusing your place on this rock, you should be eliminated from it.  I don't think that is tough, just pragmatic.  
Sorry if I made you have a sad feeling.  (((((((HUGS)))))))

 

[Roy Harding]

ALL:

Let's keep this civil - there's no need for personal attacks or insinuations.

This is a touchy and emotional subject at best - opinions regarding the subject are welcome, opinions regarding other posters are not.

I'm finding this an interesting discussion - I'd hate to see it spiral.


Roy Harding
Milnet.ca Staff

 

[Flip]

Personally, I am one who is against the death penalty,

Except in the case of terrorism or insurrection.

My objection is primarily moral.  The practical reasons are obvious.
They do sentence the wrong guys sometimes and capital punishment is
pretty much a one way street.

If the convict were to be isolated from society for life
there is little practical need to kill him.  That's the point isn't it?
Take the bad guy out of society. Beyond that, nothing is really gained.

When that Canadian confessed to murder in Texas a couple of years ago -
only to be executed anyway.  Why would anyone confess again - ever?

Why would a violent criminal potentially facing a death penalty ever
surrender peacefully?  Why escalate the violence for no practical purpose?

Don't get me wrong - I'm as frustrated as anyone here with the daycare
no sentence system we have, but I don't think the death penalty solves the
problem.

Yup, If Robert Pickton were to cross the street in front of me I could imagine
my brakes failing and leaving a large dent in my Ford Tempo.......but NOT my Buick though  


I get the feeling that business needs to be finished
Doesn't make it right.
Doesn't make it smart either.


 

 

[observor 69]

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/04/24/usdom13241.htm

U.S.: States Negligent in Use of Lethal Injections
Execution Method May Cause Agonizing Death
(New York, April 24, 2006) – Incompetence, negligence, and irresponsibility by U.S. states put condemned prisoners at needless risk of excruciating pain during lethal injection executions, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Lethal injections are used in 37 of the 38 death penalty states in the United States and by the federal government. Every execution in 2005 was by lethal injection.

The 65-page report, “So Long as They Die: Lethal Injections in the United States,” reveals the slipshod history of executions by lethal injection, using a protocol created three decades ago with no scientific research, nor modern adaptation, and still unchanged today. As the prisoner lies strapped to a gurney, a series of three drugs is injected into his vein by executioners hidden behind a wall. A massive dose of sodium thiopental, an anesthetic, is injected first, followed by pancuronium bromide, which paralyzes voluntary muscles, but leaves the prisoner fully conscious and able to experience pain. A third drug, potassium chloride, quickly causes cardiac arrest, but the drug is so painful that veterinarian guidelines prohibit its use unless a veterinarian first ensures that the pet to be put down is deeply unconscious. No such precaution is taken for prisoners being executed.
The U.S. takes more care killing dogs than people,” said Jamie Fellner, U.S. program director at Human Rights Watch and co-author of the report. “Just because a prisoner may have killed without care or conscience does not mean that the state should follow suit.” 

Human Rights Watch opposes capital punishment in all circumstances and calls for its abolition. But until the 38 death penalty states and the federal government abolish capital punishment, international human rights law requires them to ensure they have developed a method of execution that will reduce, to the greatest extent possible, the condemned prisoner’s risk of mental or physical pain and suffering. 

Human Rights Watch urges that states suspend execution by lethal injection until they have conducted a thorough review and assessment of existing and alternative methods. 

The drug sequence used in the United States was developed in 1977 by a medical examiner in Oklahoma who had no expertise in pharmacology or anesthesia. Texas quickly adopted Oklahoma’s protocol, and at least 34 other states then did too. (Nevada’s protocol remains secret). Human Right Watch found that none of the states consulted medical experts to ascertain whether the original three-drug sequence could be adapted to lessen the risk of pain to the prisoner by using other drugs or methods of administering them. 

“Copycatting is not the right way to decide how to put people to death,” said Fellner. “If a state is going to execute someone, it must do its homework, consult with experts, and select a method designed to inflict the least possible pain and suffering.” 

Without adequate or properly-administered anesthesia, prisoners executed by the three-drug sequence would be conscious during suffocation caused by the paralytic agent, and would feel the fiery pain from the potassium chloride coursing through their veins. Logs from recent executions in California, and toxicology reports from recent executions in North Carolina, suggest prisoners may in fact have been inadequately anesthetized before being put to death. 

Corrections agencies have rejected the option of executing prisoners with a single massive injection of a barbiturate, even though that should provide a painless death, because such a method would force executioners and witnesses to wait about 30 minutes longer for the prisoner’s heart to stop beating. Corrections officials have also resisted eliminating the pancuronium bromide – the paralytic agent – even though its use makes it much harder to tell if a prisoner is sufficiently anesthetized. The drug is not needed to kill the prisoner, nor does it protect him from pain: it appears intended mainly to keep his body from twitching or convulsing while dying. It also masks any pain the prisoner might be feeling, since he cannot move, cry out, or even blink his eyes. 

“Prison officials have been more concerned about sparing the sensitivities of executioners and witnesses than protecting the condemned prisoner from pain,” said Fellner. “They are more concerned with appearances than with the reality.” 

Although prisoners have for years brought legal claims that lethal injections were unconstitutionally cruel, courts have until recently given short shrift to their arguments. Troubled by new and powerful evidence of possibly botched executions, federal courts in California and North Carolina have this year refused to permit scheduled executions to take place using the standard lethal injection protocol. On April 26, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments about the procedures a prisoner must follow to challenge lethal injections. 

Until recent years, the United States was the only country in the world that used lethal injection as an execution method. Several other countries that have not yet abolished the death penalty have followed: China started using lethal injection in 1997; Guatemala executed its first prisoner by lethal injection in 1998; and the Philippines and Thailand have had lethal injection execution laws in place since 2001 (although to date, they have not executed anyone by this method). 

 

[zipperhead_cop]

Then I guess Madame Guillotine is the way to go then?

 

[GAP]

We could give them a sympathy card before we inject....

 

[PMedMoe]

international human rights law requires them to ensure they have developed a method of execution that will reduce, to the greatest extent possible, the condemned prisoner’s risk of mental or physical pain and suffering. 

And I'm sure the condemned prisoner thought of the mental or physical pain and suffering of his/her victim(s).

 

[zipperhead_cop]

And I'm sure the condemned prisoner thought of the mental or physical pain and suffering of his/her victim(s).

Stand by for obligatory pious "we have to be at a higher standard" response.  That is part of the problem.  The rule makers are arrogant and feel they have a superior position to look down from.  The system needs to lower itself to the criminals level, so that they are being dealt with in terms they understand.  All of the idiotic huggy-feely crap is interpreted as weakness to exploit.  Bad guys understand ridged, unwavering rules that are actually enforced.  Hell, they enforce their own codes of conduct in jail better than the legal system manages them on the outside. 

 

[Danjanou]

Well I have to side with ZC.

Some but not all of the persons who end up in our so called criminal justice/correctional system are just not capable of any rehabilitation/reform. They know how to play the game and what to say to the new aged touchy feeling brigade that we’ve allowed to run most aspects of our society including education, healthcare, our social safety net and the legal and corrections system. For them the only answer is good old fashioned punishment. No cable TV, no free University degrees, no conjugal visits, et cetera but  instead hard manual labour and basic food/shelter for a long long time. That good ole boy Sheriff down in Arizona or New Mexico or DB may be a route to look at.

Make jail or prison a place no wants to go to once, let alone back to. It by itself will not solve the present mess this country has allowed itself to collapse into but it is an important aspect of.  When we agree to have the big friggin stick in place then we can begin to look at the carrot, some of the root social causes such as poverty and solve them. When the ship is sinking you plug the hole first then start bailing otherwise you’re just going to sink to the bottom.

BTW when we get around to solving these root causes ( education, poveerty etc) we need to do so in the same practical manner not more touchy feely PC crap as is the case now.

To get back to the topic, sometimes punishment means the death penalty and I would support its return in carefully well thought circumstances. Acts of Treason, Killing of a LEO, Killing, abusing a child, certain other aspects of First Degree Murder, Pickton, Bernardo, and Olsen all come to mind.

Before someone brings up Morin, Marshall and Milgaard yeah the system screwed up there. There would have to be certain checks and balances in place. Confessions, overwhelming evidence, indisputable DNA etc before this punishment could be added in any case and there is still a chance, albeit a slim one, we may screw up. That however may be the price society has to pay.

Like ZC and several others my opinions were not formed in ivory tower, but dealing with this on daily basis.

 

[Flip]

Danjanou,

In nearly every respect I agree with you and ZC.

I would concede most every point made.

The exception, Death penalty.

We can accomplish, as a society, everything we need to without it.
The benefits of a death penalty beyond other measures are few.
The perils , many.

There has in the past been political and individual abuse
of justice systems and there will be again.

Perhaps Paul Bernardo has a value as a live specimen.
I dunno,
Maybe Pickton will write a book.
I don't think either will ever be a danger to anyone again.

What's the point in going down that road?
We can't come back.

 

[observor 69]

http://tinyurl.com/385k54

Dr. Charles Smith Says He's Sorry
Nov, 12 2007 - 5:20 PM


TORONTO/AM640 TORONTO - A disgraced pathologist isn't expected to testify at an inquiry until January, but he dropped a bombshell through his lawyer at the start of the hearings today.
Dr. Charles Smith, once a star pediatric forensic pathologist, has been largely unheard from since some of his findings were called into question.

In more than a dozen child deaths, Smith's opinions led to criminal proceedings or convictions, some of which have since been thrown out.

At the start of the inquiry today, Smith's lawyer read a statement saying Smith truly to sorry to all those who may have been affected by his errors.


The point of this posting is that even faith in authority figures can sometimes go wrong.
The earlier info is to note the difficulty states are having in getting chemical execution right. My understanding is a great many states have suspended executions until they can be sure they have a working system.

None of this means I oppose execution but rather to demonstrate the difficulty in getting it right.

 

[Danjanou]

Sorry bud, the only value I see Bernardo having is as a target puller in the buts on the 81mm Mortar range.

Pickton writing a book, well fortunately we now have law in place that state that any financial gain from such an enterprise must go to the families of the victims. Although one wonders if any cash would compensate them for their loss especially if the price was having to read in lurid details of their loved ones demise.

Naah the pig farmer can be handcuffed to pretty boy Paul on the assigned duties I outlined in the first sentence. Good ole Clifford can join them, many hands make light work and all that.

Trust me I’m a peaceful man, a pacifist, and for the most part non violent. I was that way during my time in uniform too. I saw no contradiction then BTW. I trained as as soldier to take life and later trained others to do so as part to the job. For a just society to exist there must be rough men guarding the walls and sometimes needed to commit quick and controlled violence on behalf of the society as retribution. I had no qualms being one of them. 

Same applies now. I also believe that the rights of society  are forfeited by those who willingly choose to step outside the rules of that society.

 

[Bane]

Danjanou,
In nearly every respect I agree with you and ZC.
I would concede most every point made.
The exception, Death penalty.

I would agree that also Flip and with your early comment that once taken out of society, what's the point of going further. Just lock them up and 'have a nice day'. They are already out of the playground.  The justice system is a human system and therefore suject to error.  There is therefore a likely hood that at some point an innocent person will be killed.  Why bother taking that chance. 

 

[Danjanou]

Ok fine we just lock them up for a long time.

Life means life though and our new improved penal system is modeled after this guys. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio

But because I’m such a sensitive guy. Some inmates like  those I’ve referred to above are handed a razor blade and a body bag instead of cookies and milk before being sent for nap time in solitary.  >

Happy now?