You think it’s immoral for “the state” to execute people, but it’s fine to put people in a cage for fifty, sixty years, with no prospect of release? Personally, I find the latter much more repugnant and immoral.
ETA: changed “not okay” to ‘immoral’
There is no reason why incarceration needs to be especially unpleasant unless you make that the policy. See the modern European prisons for long term offenders that are not designed to send people crazy like the regimes in the US are.
Which one is easier to rectify if the state later finds out it fucked up?
But that is often the real-world, contemporary alternative in the US. And, while that remains the case, it’s specious (IMO) to rail against the death penalty.
This, also. There are many variations of prison that can be adjusted to fit our needs. There is only one death, and there is nothing we can do to change it.
I want to say, ‘don’t let perfect be the enemy of good’, but I suspect you’d not be convinced.
ETA: I have to go back to work. Apologies. My silence is not lack of interest. I’ll close now by asking - does not prevention of murders in prison, by murderers, in any way offset the execution of one innocent person?
Are you sure about that? Would you agree that morality is subjective?
We can be perfect- not execute any innocent people- by not executing anybody.
We can also prevent people from murdering each other in prison, or at least do all that we can. No, preventing killings in prison would not justify killing an innocent person. Would you voluntarily be killed in order to reduce prison violence? I thought not.
Has it been shown the states that use the death penalty on a regular basis have less in-prison murders?
So, if I’ve spent 20 years in prison in fear of my life everyday, being subjected to God only knows what on a daily basis and then I’m released, do you honestly believe that you’ve reversed my punishment?
Not entirely, but a damn sight more than if we had executed you and then find out you didn’t do it. I don’t think hearing us say “oopsies!” from the great beyond will be much consolation for you.
uh huh. Only red-necks in the US…
Name calling is the mark of the morally weak.
But I’ll explain it to you, in your weakened state. “We the people” declared ourselves free from tyranny and fought a war over it to gain independence. The constitution that was created from this was designed to prevent future tyranny. It was well thought out. The people who wrote it were not red necks.
The United States is a young country but it is one of the oldest democracies. The constitution that created it is the well spring for the democracies that followed. “We the people” held the principles sacred enough to fight for them when those democracies were threatened.
We hold human life to a higher standard than you do. The cost of that responsibility is a forfeiture of the right to life when a life is taken with malice. The forfeiture is created by the individual, not the state. The state carries it out. That you don’t agree with this is irrelevant. Your opinion doesn’t matter beyond the right to say it. We will continue to defend that right at the cost of our lives.
If I wanted to perform a novel sacrifice procedure on an animal in a non-clinical setting, I would have to get IACUC approval and divulge the list and suppliers of the compounds being used. I would also have to justify that the use of those compounds in reducing pain and discomfort. Here, the State of Oklahoma used a secret, untested concoction of compounds to kill another human being. Again, these drugs were administered to another human being without having to divulge what drugs were used. I am left with an the conclusion that white people care more about providing humane treatment to animals than they do to human beings on death row. Indeed, the support on this forum for “botched” executions is so monstrous that it should be in some post-apocalyptic novel.
KarlGauss, with all due respect, whether you (or anyone else here) supports the death penalty is immaterial. I am referring to the widespread support (including your support) for botched executions as an acceptable means to kill another human being. Whether you support or approve the death penalty, what happened to Lockett should have left you (and others) outraged.
- Honesty
Dear Santa Claus,
I don’t need anything for myself, but if you could send a mirror to Magiver I would be very grateful.
Yours Truly,
Czarcasm
Well, it was Oklahoma, so it’s pretty much expected that anything coming out of there will be distinctly bush league.
One might think so.
But, then, it’s unusual for support for a death penalty to be free of vindictiveness. And vindictive feelings are often best satisfied by the creation of as much pain and distress as possible.
So there’s that.
Magiver and Czarcasm, knock it off, now.
[ /Moderating ]
“Not entirely”? Try not even remotely close. From what I’ve heard about prison, I think I’d rather take an “oopsie” in the grave.
Rosa Parks being compared to a brutal convicted killer probably has her doing somersaults in her grave, even more so than in this instance.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt in assuming you’ve misinterpreted my plea to give it a break and to put down your broad brush.
The paint job I was referring to involves your screed containing gems such as:
With that cleared up, do you care to respond to my plea to cease your simplistic and blanket accusations of racisms in the case under discussion?