Under the auspices of the Court System of the State of California, instituted undewr the Constitution of the United States of America which is the ultimate authority and is embodied in the Executive, Judicial and Legislative arms of the USA.
Sorry, weak argument.
See above.
You just don’t know how far from Engels I am. :wally
Not everyone who disagrees with the USA is a Marxist.
I can assure you Pjen does not speak for all Britons.
As polls have constantly reflected the great majority of people in the United Kingdom are in favour of the death penalty for certain offences. British politicians, of course, can safely ignore this, as they have done for years, secure in the knowledge that, come election time, other issues will affect the way people vote (and all major parties sing from the same hymn sheet on this matter.)
In the US, a far purer democracy, politicians ignore the voters at their peril.
Politicians in the US
D’oh! Ignore that lasr fragment in my previous post.
I give up.
Belarus is not even a democracy in any meaningful way. Japan retains the death penalty but uses it extremely rarely (one person last year)- however I still exclude it on those grounds.
Decisions on whether to extradite to systems that kill prisoners is difficult, but the refusal to engage in the actual practice is commendable all the same.
Of the countries who retain the practice of killing prisoners and are reasonably “Western” are:
* Antigua and Barbuda
* Bahamas
* Barbados
* Guatemala
* Guyana
* Jamaica
* Japan
* Malaysia
* Philippines
* St. Kitts and Nevis
* St. Lucia
* St. Vincent and the Grenadines
* Singapore
* United States
Of these the USA killed 60, Singapore 2 and Japan 1. All others killed none.
And not everyone in the USA has the attitude to kill prisoners.
I see you live in Scotland.
You must eat haggis. You call that civilized?
Do people in Scotland automatically change the way they do things when the people in England and Wales do it a different way?
Speak for youself. I argue that things are wrong because there’s reasons for them being wrong other than what the general concensus opinion of the “modern conscience” is.
No, I mistook you for somebody trying to make a useful point, and who might like to know why he or she was failing to do so even with people who share your basic belief.
That’s not an argument. That’s an opinion.
Back it up some non-fallacious reasoning, then it becomes an argument.
And secure in the knowledge that reinstituting the death penalty would get you kicked out out of the E.U.
Pjen, you’re making some good points, but they’re hidden by your stridency. With the exception of the always bitter, bilious, vile, and vicious weirddave, all of the posters arguing with you would be perfectly willing to listen to you make your points if you could do it without the bashing. Unless, of course, the bashing is the point.
Thank you for making a distinction between America and the civilized world. Under the Republicans, we have become, culturally, a Third World nation. A banana Republican state, if you will.
I never said they did. I just said that the condemnation will transfer to them automatically.
Get used to it. It’s only another sausage. At least its not made from mechanically recovered meat like most US cold cuts!
No, but we consider that we are part of a political alliance and follow the best practice in each country. The United Kingdom would not remain so unless there was some respect for basic shared morals and beliefs. The group of civilized western countries ditto.
Canada does not have a policy forbidding extradition of an accused criminal facing the death penalty. In fact, if I’m reading it right, they will extradite their own citizens facing the death penalty. (At least to the U.S.) To me, this is a moral inconsistency and Canada should indeed be included on Pjen’s list of non-Western Civilizations. 
France does have such a policy, and did not extradite Einhorn until they were assured that he would not face the death penalty.
In the best possible way you are right. I strongly believe that some moral issues become ‘Right’ not from reasoned argument but from deeply held cultural beliefs. Things that are in opposition to this moral spine cause revulsion. Those beliefs change over time. Some parts of the polity are revolted earlier, some later, but there is a direction.
I don’t believe that slavery is wrong for economic, social, or even political reasons. I believe it is wrong because slavery is wrong period. To a civilized person slavery must simply be wrong because it is not civilized. It disgusts. It revolts. We can live without it and be better people.
Similarly I do not believe that killing prisoners is wrong because of criminology, economics, social safety etc… I believe it is wrong because it is not civilized. It disgusts. It revolts. We can live without it and be better people.
Close to witnessing, but there you are.
Okay. I thought that France had simply insisted that Einhorn face a new trial, in person. Not that they insisted that capital punishment come off the table. Thanks for the correction.
Allow me to capture some points and make my own, highly opinionated, observations.
The real question on this part of the argument, to me, is whether or not competent due process has been granted. Were good attorney’s appointed to the defense? Were all appeals exhausted? Did the SCOTUS say its OK? Then proceed with the execution.
Life without parole is good enough, it protects society. Deny the inmate all contact with the outside world. Also a paper tiger. First of all, while it may protect most of society, please stop to consider the safety of correctional officers and other prison staff. Even those inmates in “solitary confinement” require medical care, feeding, exercise (The SCOTUS standard for confinement in custody is a 23 hour a day max - one hour of exercise). After that, the inmate also has contact with Attornies, family members, clergy… got the idea? It doesn’t protect anywhere near as many people as you would like to think.
It is flat out immoral for the state to kill. BUNK. Armies do it Police officers occasionally kill in the line of duty, and save other lives doing it. Or, would you rather have the officer interuppting your being beaten to a pulp in the street stop and offer the assailant counseling? Corollary - it is immoral for the state to kill prisoners. MORE BUNK. See #1 above - unless your sense of morality is akin to a pure pacifist, there are always scenarios where a use of deadly physical force is justified AND moral. Pretending these situations don’t exist is naive and betrays a lack of experience in the real world.
Execution doesn’t accomplish anything other than revenge. BLECH. Studies have shown that an overwhelming percentage of criminals who have been executed are extremely unlikely to recidivate. No cite.
Bailing out now- must return to the real world. Back tomorrow.
Me too. I’m growing concerned that if we stop the death penalty we’ll become one of these snooty civilized nations that he keeps babbling about. I don’t want to be civilized. Americans pride themselves on being independent barbarians. Is there some horrid custom we can cling to that will keep us uncivilized once we drop the death penalty? Will American football be sufficient?
Which is why your position is untenable. Trying to force your own set of morals on everyone else without a decent argument isn’t going to cut it. Slavery is wrong solely because anyone can be sold into slavery through no fault of their own. The death penalty is different, however, in that, in a “perfect system” the only way to be executed would to have committed a capital crime. However, your argument isn’t focussing on the inability of real systems to live up to a perfect system, it’s centred around your belief that the state executing a prisoner is morally wrong.
I’m not a death penalty supporter, BTW.
The executive and legislative branches of government “of the USA” did not have the right to reverse the jury’s decision in this case. The U.S. Supreme Court (which did) declined to hear the case.
Sorry, more lack of understanding on your part of the judicial system in this country.
More on the appeals process for you (from Wikipedia):
"On January 13, 2006, (California Governor) Schwarzenegger refused to grant Allen clemency, stating that “his conduct did not result from youth or inexperience, but instead resulted from the hardened and calculating decisions of a mature man.” Schwarzenegger also cited a poem in which Allen glorified his actions, where Allen wrote "We rob and steal and for those who squeal are usually found dying or dead." (bolding added for fans of the cold-blooded)*
On January 15, 2006, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied Allen’s claim that executing an aged or infirm person was cruel and unusual punishment, observing that his mental acuity was unimpaired and that he had been fifty years of age when he arranged the murders from prison. Judge Kim Wardlaw writing for the panel of judges Susan Graber, Richard Clifton and herself:
His age and experience only sharpened his ability to coldly calculate the execution of the crime. Nothing about his current ailments reduces his culpability and thus they do not lessen the retributive or deterrent purposes of the death penalty."*
You’re a good facsimile of a dolt who doesn’t care how much he damages the cause about which he allegedly is concerned, just so he can get in a wild swing at Amerika.
Huh. Allen plagiarized Bonnie Parker.
You hold no objective reasons for being against what we today see as abhorrent things? Really?
I suppose that’s a safe path if you assume things will keep getting “better” according to your morality. What if Europe reverts to an earlier time period or even mimics the U.S.'s stance on the death penalty sometime in the future? Will you throw your hands up in the air and say, “Well, it’s in vogue now, I can’t do anything since I had no reason to oppose it before”?
It seems if everyone thought along that vein then no progress would ever be made. Why should women have ever gotten the right to vote? It was a deeply held cultural belief that they didn’t have the faculties to exercise such a “right.”
I got some good chuckles out of your unique perspective on what countries count as being a part of the ‘Western World.’ Do tell more!