|
18 Sep 12 - 02:33 PM (#3406862) Subject: BS: Too obese to execute From: Wesley S Maybe I'm weird but this story stuck me as funny. Especially the part about "Indeed, given his unique physical and medical condition there is a substantial risk that any attempt to execute him will result in serious physical and psychological pain to him," Convicted killer says he's too fat to be executed 11:42 am September 18, 2012, by George Mathis AP A convicted killer who became "morbidly obese" in prison says he's now too fat to be executed. Ronald Post, who pleaded guilty in 1985 to killing a hotel clerk in Ohio, now weighs almost 500 pounds. He is scheduled to be executed in January, but has filed papers in federal court arguing his death by lethal injection would create severe problems for executioners. First of all, his thick layer of fat would make it difficult of doctors to find a vein. Ohio executes inmates with a single dose of pentobarbital, usually injected through the arms. And then there's the matter of the flimsy metal gurneys. Post thinks his immense girth would break those. "Indeed, given his unique physical and medical condition there is a substantial risk that any attempt to execute him will result in serious physical and psychological pain to him, as well as an execution involving a torturous and lingering death," the federal filing said. Post, 53, has tried to lose weight. His request for gastric bypass surgery was denied. He's been encouraged not to walk because he's at risk for falling, and severe depression has contributed to his inability to limit how much he eats, his filing said. While at the Mansfield Correctional Institution, Post "used that prison's exercise bike until it broke under his weight," according to the filing. He now uses a wheelchair. Post killed Slumber Inn hotel clerk Helen Grace Vantz Dec. 15, 1983, in Elyria, Ohio. He shot the 53-year-old woman in the back of the head twice and escaped with $100 and a 13-inch black and white TV set. Vantz's son, William, laughed Monday when he heard about Post's request, according to The Cleveland Plain Dealer. Then he became serious. "I don't care if they have to wheel him in on a tractor-trailer; 30 years is too long," William Vantz said. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 02:45 PM (#3406866) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu If they still have the murder weapon, I have a suggestion. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 02:45 PM (#3406868) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert I'd say the correct thing to do is truck in a couple hundred Big Macs and let the boy go out happy with a heart attack... B~ |
|
18 Sep 12 - 02:48 PM (#3406870) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Jack the Sailor He is in prison. They supply his food. He doesn't need surgery. They need to cut his portions. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 02:58 PM (#3406877) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Don Firth Or following Bobert's lead, how about a steady diet of bacon-cheeseburgers, topped off with a dessert of deep-fried twinkies? Lotsa between meal snacks. . . . Don Firth |
|
18 Sep 12 - 03:07 PM (#3406884) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: meself "First of all, his thick layer of fat would make it difficult of doctors to find a vein." Are there actually "doctors" involved in the process of execution? If so, I wonder how they reconcile their behaviour with the Hippocratic Oath? |
|
18 Sep 12 - 03:08 PM (#3406885) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Stim He committed the crime in 1983. It's 2012. When people wait for a long period of time, they tend to get hungry |
|
18 Sep 12 - 03:22 PM (#3406895) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: catspaw49 It wouldn't be the first time that we here in the Buckeye state had a problem in executions. One of the last and most bizarre executions here in Ohio before they stopped the death penalty (it's on again now obviously) was actually held on Halloween in 1953 at the Ohio Penitentiary in Columbus. Frank Howard had been an employee of the Baltimore and Ohio railroad for almost 25 years. He had started out as flagman on freight trains and eventually worked his way up through the ranks to become the conductor on one of the B&O's most prestigious passenger trains, the Cumberland Valley Limited. After a few years on that run he had come up with a small gang of porters and baggagemen to aid in his scheme which involved the theft of specific items of value from the rooms and luggage of wealthier passengers. He had this carefully crafted so as not to be blatantly noticeable, ie, they never took entire cases or anything that would lead anyone to believe they had been robbed, but rather had perhaps misplaced or lost a particular item....or left it at home. Being the conductor on the train, Howard would listen to the passengers and generally be able to convince them that a report wasn't needed and on the few occasions it was, the railroad saw no problem. Things were reported missing on trains all the time. It worked pretty well and wasn't a huge moneymaker, but it effectively doubled the salries of all involved with a few extra bucks for Howard, over and above his share. This became apparent to one of his henchman named Washington who confronted Howard on it. Howard was a man with a hot temper and perhaps Washington was cowed by the rage. In any case, he backed down and came up with a new plan. Washington decided he'd do a little freelancing. This of course blew the whole carefully done scheme of Frank Howard. Howard walked into Union station in Columbus and in full view of a hundred people, shot Washington dead. Howard claimed that Washington was a thief and escaping which sounded good, but before too long, Howard's other men began to talk and the whole thing was exposed. Howard was arrested, charged, and convicted of first degree murder along with the assorted thefts. He received the death sentence and after all of the appeals had been exhausted, he was scheduled for execution in the electric chair for October 31, 1953. He was strapped in and shaved, wet-down and hooked up. At the appointed time the switch was pulled and Howard's body became rigid and then trembled violently. After 20 seconds the switch was turned off but Howard was still alive. After a brief conference it was decided to increase the voltage and time. First they checked the equipment which seemed to be functioning. This done, after 45 seconds and smoke coming from his body, Howard was found to still be alive! Once again they upped both voltage and time, but again the result was a living and breathing Frank Howard. At this point, the priest, the warden, and the doctor decided that the humane thing to do was to give him an injection. The only thing the doctor had was morphine with which they overdosed him and 20 minutes later he was declared legally dead. After removing the body they went through another series of tests on the chair and the wiring and once again found that everything was in working order and should have killed Howard in the first 20 seconds. No one knew why it didn't work, but they surmised the problem was that Frank Howard was simply a bad conductor. Spaw Please don't kill me |
|
18 Sep 12 - 03:41 PM (#3406905) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Frightening. Still, keep banging the rocks together and one day, the whole rather than sections of The USA can call itself civilised. Still murdering your citizens and discussing the technicalities rather than the crime of state murder How the flying fuck did you manage to get men on the moon? |
|
18 Sep 12 - 03:43 PM (#3406908) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Don Firth Spaw, you're my man! I'm gonna torment all my friends with that one! Don Firth |
|
18 Sep 12 - 03:55 PM (#3406915) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Becca72 LOL Spaw! |
|
18 Sep 12 - 04:22 PM (#3406934) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert Maybe he had a bad disconnection??? B~ |
|
18 Sep 12 - 04:25 PM (#3406936) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Wesley S "How the flying fuck did you manage to get men on the moon?" I was going to say that those are two different subjects - but both involve a certain amount of technological expertise and good old American know-how. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 04:36 PM (#3406940) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: McGrath of Harlow "Only in America". Thank God. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 04:46 PM (#3406945) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert Ya'll remind me to tell ya' my Hog-falls-out-of-pickup-truck-doing- 60-mph story sometime... Not now... B~ |
|
18 Sep 12 - 05:01 PM (#3406957) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu Yes, it IS tragic, McGrath, that the US penal system does not have better nutricians on staff to help this poor lad lose weight so they ice his sorry ass without feeling guilty. WTF? He shot a 53 year old clerk in the head TWICE... TWICE!... for $100 and a 13" TV and you holier than thou fuckers are shitting on those that would off this piece of trash... in a HUMANE way? Fuck him... he needs to lose weight? needs to cut his dietary intake? Cut his fuckin throat. That'll reduce his weight and his burden on society. Now, if he came from a "bad home" and was on drugs and blah, blah, blah... yes I can see rehab and all the rest of it. But, I haven't read the trial transcript. Have youse read it and based your posts for clemency on that reading at this point in time? Don't answer because it's obvious you haven't or you would have posted to that effect. "... serious physical and psychological pain to him,..." Bullshit. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 05:35 PM (#3406985) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: catspaw49 Ya' know, it seems to me that as they talk of "humane" killings its just dumb. Physical pain and pschological pain..........uh, yeah..........Look, if you are so barbaric that you must have a death sentence than here's some options. Give the inmate the decision from a list of possibilities. Hanging, firing squad electrocution....Its all on the table........just choose. I think they need to include another that's not mentioned. If it were me choosing, I'd request a 12 gauge magnum in the mouth or a handgun such as a 44 or 357 that would be guaranteed to do the job. A bit messy but no apin or suffering which sounds more humane to me than lethal injection or gas. Spaw |
|
18 Sep 12 - 06:01 PM (#3406999) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: McGrath of Harlow As I said, only in America, Thank God. Where the murder rate is four times as high as it is in Western Europe. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 06:02 PM (#3407002) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bill D I find myself quite conflicted about capital punishment. I see clearly that far too many innocent people have been sentenced to death, and that we MUST avoid such things. I also see 'reality shows' about prisons where there are an increasing number of very dangerous prisoners sentenced to 'life without parole' for some very heinous crimes... and who take the view that "it can't get any worse", so they take up a 'hobby' of trying to kill or injure other inmates or staff. We spend 30-50,000 a year just 'guarding' and feeding people who are totally dedicated to being as big a problem as possible and who CANNOT be released. Add to this the strange confusion about avoiding inflicting 'temporary' pain on someone who will in a few minutes have NO pain, and it just doesn't all make sense. IF you have a death penalty, why is technique so important? I don't know what to suggest!!~.... but I **predict** that IF trends continue, in a few years down the road, much resistance to capital punishment will weaken as we run out of spaces and money to build new prisons and can't hire guards willing to risk THEIR lives.... we shall see, hmmm? |
|
18 Sep 12 - 06:06 PM (#3407007) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu The murder rate is higher because of the social problems not addressed by the government. The murder rate is not that much higher because trash like this guy is legally murdered. Matter of fact, that plus or minus part of the statistics? I'd say it's a plus in his case. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 06:09 PM (#3407011) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Don Firth It's real easy to point fingers and accuse, but it's something else to come up with a viable solution. 'Twas ever this. Don Firth |
|
18 Sep 12 - 06:29 PM (#3407028) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bill D "...social problems not addressed by the government." Umm... right. Care to outline briefly just how to 'address' those problems? Or even to define the problems clearly? Education? Jobs? Kindness? Fewer violent TV programs? A psychological test to determine if one should be allowed to have children? (It seems that 'fewer firearms' that allow 'easy' murder is off the table) |
|
18 Sep 12 - 06:33 PM (#3407032) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu The solution is to nuture... to clothe, to feed, to save from harm, to eductae, to value, to... Not to throw young babes to the wind and wolves. That is the downfall. But, that does not negate culling society of such a monster that would execute a hotel clerk in this manner. Prove he was a victim and I'll read him bedtime stories. If not, lights out, time to go to sleep. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 06:45 PM (#3407044) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bill D Those solutions sound very nice..... "the devil is in the details" ...but execute this obese guy in a non-painful way, and the protesters will line up by the thousands.......... no easy answers. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 07:01 PM (#3407050) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu "The devil" is the society that doesn't nuture the child. No details. How do you nuture every child? Apparently ya can't or that motel clerk might still be alive. That's the real debate. That's the real challenge. As for non-painful, I agree with that. But he doesn't wanna go that way soooo... ? |
|
18 Sep 12 - 07:12 PM (#3407052) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: McGrath of Harlow Basically killing people is bad for an individual, and it is bad for a society. And it doesn't work as a way of making murder less common - if anything the evidence points the opposite way. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 07:15 PM (#3407054) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bill D You can get 17 different views of what is 'good' nurturing. Do you just define failed nurturing by pointing at failed people? I personally know people who tried all sorts of love and 'nurture' and had a kid with real problems.... and there are many examples of it going the other way and good people coming from bad environments. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 07:28 PM (#3407056) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert Let's just work on the idea of sanctity of life... That means no capital punishment as well as more opportunity for success, better education and way less hand guns... B~ |
|
18 Sep 12 - 08:01 PM (#3407064) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu NO hand guns. Health care. Education. People fed and clothed and housed. Not forcing poor people into planes to take them 8000 miles away to kill poeple who are more poor than they are with weapons that cost far more than it would take to provide all of them health care, educate them, feed them, clothe them and house them. But the fat guy? If he wasn't in dire straights, fry his ass and don't get all sappy about it. The families of his victim have been paying tax dollars to keep that piece of trash alive and gettin fat fer far too long. ONE last time... if it wasn't his fault, free him. If it was his fault, fry him. Next thing I'll be hearing is that MacDonald's is at fault for makin fat people fat. Gimmie a fuckin break. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 08:41 PM (#3407083) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,999 Having looked at only the thread title, I think there is a song in there. Too obese to execute, dah dah, Too obtuse to sub se quent ly Send your moth er flowers on the phone. Too obese to elocute, dah dah, I am the dez ig nate ed driver, Call the police and let them know That fats is drivin' 'round. Has the makings of a shanty, no? |
|
18 Sep 12 - 09:08 PM (#3407093) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert You've written better stuff, brucie... lol... Hey, the way I look at it, the prison has fattened this guy up over the last 30 years and he ain't gonna live all that long so... ...just pardon him... He's already been punished with 30 years of crappy food... Like who is he gonna kill now... I mean, other than himself... B~ |
|
18 Sep 12 - 10:15 PM (#3407111) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu 30 years of crappy food? He's fat. It couldn't have been THAT crappy. |
|
18 Sep 12 - 10:38 PM (#3407119) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert Nah, Gn-ze... Obesity has been traced to crappy food... Another report on it just this evening on NBC news... B~ |
|
19 Sep 12 - 04:45 AM (#3407188) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza This whole scenario is disgusting and appalling. The Death Penalty should be abolished everywhere. I just can't imagine people coldly discussing how to kill a man by different methods, it's sinister and chilling. I'm very glad we don't have such horrors in UK. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 05:00 AM (#3407191) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: CET Gnu, I suppose that you would be equally in favor of executing someone found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, of raping and murdering young girls (Guy-Paul Morin, Stephen Truscott) or raping and stabbing a nurse and leaving her to die in the snow (David Milgaard). As a Canadian, you should know what those three have in common. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 05:25 AM (#3407201) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish This man has been in prison for 30 years. What kind of country imprisons people for 30 years and THEN kills them? I find this thread quite horrible, along with some of the sentiments in here..I'm not excusing what he's done, but when people fail to see that 30 years in prison is punishment enough, then that worries me bigtime. I find the American Justice System to be one of the most vile in the world. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 05:54 AM (#3407214) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Ah, well; as the old legal saw has it, the hard cases make the bad law. If there were any solution to the problem of how to dispose of the irredeemable psychopath, the imprisonment of whom puts all his guards, nurses, carers, fellow-prisoners, and indeed all of society [if we are to let him out after 30 years, Lizzie, then just hope he doesn't chance your children's way] at undeserved risk, while many people's morality revolts at the very idea of deliberately and judicially ending anyone's life by whatever means --- --- then surely such solution would have been found by now. Meanwhile we shall just have to do the best we can ~~ which is not very... Something to be said, as I have remarked before, for the concept, in not a doctrinal but a practical sense, of Original Sin. ~M~ |
|
19 Sep 12 - 06:29 AM (#3407219) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: johncharles Tarring all Americans with the same brush seems unfair. As I understand it there are currently 17 states which do not support capital punishment. The second largest state Texas does have capital punishment and since 1976 has executed 484 people,about 36% of the total number of executions in the USA. john |
|
19 Sep 12 - 06:42 AM (#3407224) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Stu No revenge because he's too fat? You couldn't make it up. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 07:00 AM (#3407229) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Jack the Sailor I cannot help but observe that, in his condition, he is hardly a danger to society. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 09:40 AM (#3407287) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: kendall The population of America is over 300 million. What is the population of western Europe? Maine has 1.1 million people, no death penalty and it is one of the top 3 safest states to live. We are not all gun wielding assholes. Ignorance and despair are the real culprits. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 01:01 PM (#3407379) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Don Firth Lizzie, your blanket condemnation of the "American Justice System" graphically demonstrates your ignorance of that which you condemn. There is NO "American Justice System." Within guidelines set by the Constitution, which all the individual states must adhere to, each state makes most of its own laws. Capital punishment is practiced in some states and is banned in others. Your all-too-frequent blanket condemnations of whole groups of people for the offenses of a few grow tiresome, display your ignorance of that which you condemn, and are the hallmark of the bigot. Don Firth |
|
19 Sep 12 - 03:39 PM (#3407419) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: McGrath of Harlow The population of Western Europe is just under 400 million. Rather higher than the USA's 300 million. And a whole lot fewer murders. Though the significant thing is murder rate, not overall numbers And there the position is that Western and Central Europe has a murder rate of 1.5 per 100,000 while the United States has 6.1 per hundred thousand. Of course there are a lot pof countries with higher murder rates than the USA, some a lot higher. But in all cases they are countries where people are far poorer, and which aren't really comparable to teh USA in the way Westen Europe is. Of course poverty and so forth aren't by any means the only factors involved - and of course there are a whole lot of far poorer countries which have a much lower rate than the USA. I doubt if the actual numnber of executions is too significant in such respects. More relevant might be the impact that the existence of government authorised killings has on the mindset of some people. More especially perhaps drawn out death sentences over many decades. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 05:26 PM (#3407448) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu CET... he pleaded guilty. Maybe you missed that? He DID it by his OWN admission... no false witnesses, no DNA required, no fuck all. Gimmie a break EH? Yeah, I am a Canuck and I know what you mean. Do YOU know what *I* mean? Seriously, I want your answer. On accounta your post makes no sense as far as this case is concerned. The fact that you say you, "... suppose that you {meaning gnu} would be equally in favor of executing someone found guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, of raping and murdering young girls..." implies that you think I cannot discern the difference between an accused and someone who has ADMITTED IN A COURT OF LAW THAT HE DID IT! WTF do you not understaand about that? Seriously, I find your character assisination of me of the worst and most virulent kind and I am truly offended. Tell ya what, all your warm and fuzzy bears out there... I say he should live! Do NOT execute him! But, if he loses weight, hang the fucker. Lethal injection costs money and rope can be recycled... I am all about being green, me. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 08:36 PM (#3407503) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Little Hawk This sounds like a problem Eddie Whatnoll might run into if they had capital punishment in the UK...and if Eddie got sentenced to it. Fortunately, they don't. In Eddie's case, even getting him to the prison might prove to be exceedingly difficult. Olive's been trying to just get him off the couch for years. Kind of like Mohammed and the mountain. |
|
19 Sep 12 - 10:41 PM (#3407546) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: CET So you would execute people who plead guilty, but not those who present a defence and lose? How many guilty pleas do you think there are in first degree murder cases in the real world? The point I wanted to make about the death penalty is that where it exists, innocent people are found guilty and killed by the State. That is a fact. If you want to kill this fat guy, you have to accept killing people like Morin, Milgaard, Truscott and all the others. There are only two verdicts on any charge: guilty and not guilty. There is no "really, really guilty" or "guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt" or "guilty plus he admitted it". I don't think you really want to put Guy-Paul Morin to death, but you have not thought through the logic of what you wrote. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 04:18 AM (#3407599) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza It isn't to do with who pleads guilty, who doesn't, what they did or why. A person kills another person. That is not a reason to cold-bloodedly take their life. How does that make you any better than them? It is never right to take a life. That is why murder is the most heinous crime. To execute a murderer is murder too. Vengeance is a very basic and primitive reaction, and in some parts of the world we have evolved beyond it now. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 04:33 AM (#3407605) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket A murder is a murder. Two murders are two murders. Hopefully, those who murder on behalf of their ragged tattered Stars and Stripes manage to sleep at night. If not, there are medications available, but like the ones used for lethal injection, wouldn't it be funny if The UK refused an export licence for them too, if they had to get them from the first world. Eliza has a point, and a point shared by many friends I have in The USA. It shouldn't be the fear of executing innocent people that drives abolition, it is the act of killing people itself. Incarceration is to protect society. Anything over and above that is understandable with regard to the victims's friends and family, but unforgivable with regards to everybody else. We, including The USA, have courts and juries in order to look at facts without emotion or bias. If you give the death penalty, you might as well not bother with blind justice, as you are pandering to emotion rather than protecting society. And that is what makes it so sick. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 04:50 AM (#3407613) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: CET For me, it isn't the fear of executing the innocent that makes me opposed to the death penalty, it is the certainty. I do agree rationally that the death penalty is wrong in itself, but in all honesty that is not really what drives my opposition. There are plenty of murderers whose execution I would not regret, and I would not regard their killing as murder. However, if the State can kill these people, then it WILL kill the innocent. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 05:09 AM (#3407617) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza When quite young, I used to be very severe in my opinion that a murderer deserved to die etc. I was all for the Death Penalty of 'hanging by the neck until dead', and sorry to see it abolished here in UK. But my old father (who'd seen death in all its forms during the War) once asked me to imagine the felon in his last moments being pinioned, led to the scaffold, a bag put over his head, the rope noose placed around his neck and the lever ready to push for the 'drop'. He asked me, "Now, in all sincerity, would YOU push that lever?" And I had to admit I couldn't have done so. He asked me why not, and it was because to take a life like that in cold blood seemed so obviously wrong. I have to add that the last British Executioner, Albert Pierrepoint, in his autobiography, came to the same conclusion, that hanging was no deterrent, that it was pointless and wrong, and he had no regrets that it had been abolished. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 06:56 PM (#3407949) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute? From: Donuel The title sounds like a polite way of saying to fat to fuck. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 08:11 PM (#3407980) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu "So you would execute people who plead guilty, but not those who present a defence and lose?" Why do you have the right to put words in my mouth? THAT is EXTREMELY offensive. DO NOT EVER do that again... not to this little black duck. And then you say, "There are plenty of murderers whose execution I would not regret, and I would not regard their killing as murder." Huh? This is not acceptable to me as it is not a logical discussion. Therefore... have fun with it. gnightgnu. PS... BTW, if ya cut the fucker's throat, he will lose weight. Even more green than using a rope. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 08:38 PM (#3408000) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bill D "However, if the State can kill these people, then it WILL kill the innocent. Sadly, it is true in some places. If a combination of careless police, labs, prosecutors, judges and 'community standards' exists that tend to 'expedite justice', then innocents WILL at times be executed. The question is, do we prevent this ONLY by banning all executions, or is there some way to allow it in cases where there is NO doubt, as in mass murder on video, or with multiple witnesses and a confession?... (Batman shootings in theater.) When it is all forensic evidence and hearsay and biased witnesses, I think it should be illegal to even make capital punishment an option. The trouble is, we have such contradictory idea about if and when any killing of a person or persons is justified. (and sometimes even about how to define either murder OR personhood.) I tend to agree that 'some' murders deserve execution, to rid ourselves of their burden on society... but I would not relish the job of working out a fair, sane way to decide. |
|
20 Sep 12 - 09:17 PM (#3408013) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert So back when about 19, Jim Clark and I were driving to Fredricksburg, Va on Route 17 and, well, he had brought a flask and I had me a sip or two and mist not have been driving to well after if 'cause Officer Snivey pulled us over and asked me if I had been drinkin' and I said, "Well, I mighta" and then he asks if Jim had been drinking and he said he hadn't so Officer Spivey told Jim to drive and told me that I was done... What the hell does Officer Spivey know about anything, right??? So we get down the road a tad and I tell Jim to pull over and I get back behind the wheel... 'Bout 10 miles down the road we come upon an old Chevy pickup truck with a big ol' hog in the back and it's swervin'bad 'casue that hog is all over the back of that truck... I'm trying to find a way to get around it but being a two lane road was gonna take some careful timing and plannin' and all that... So I see my opportunity and it's pedal to the metal... Well, just as I was about to make my move to go around the hog truck the hog figures out how to open up the tail gate and takes a hog dive out the back... Oh oh... The following few seconds weren't going to turn out well as Mr. Hog all but exploded before me and the '57 Oldsmobile that I was driving as Mr. Hog and the Olds got to know each other a lot better than either one of them woke up that morning hopin' to find... When it was over Mr. Hog was spread over about 600 feet of Rt. 17 and I, along with the Olds and Jim Clark were in someone's corn field... As luck would have it, my buddy Officer Spivey, show up before I can get out from behind the wheel... No, lets call that bad luck... The rest of the story involves bail, attorneys, court, fines and my 2nd 6 month suspension of my driving privileges in a 3 year period... Never mind... B~ |
|
21 Sep 12 - 05:57 AM (#3408139) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle Perhaps if you got realy really fat, they'd let you off altogether... I'm quite obese, could I do in Romney and Ryan? |
|
21 Sep 12 - 06:17 AM (#3408146) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket Come on Al. if you're offering, why stop there? There is only one way I can see of closing the Th*tcher thread, and you may have hit upon a good solution? I have myself a little list.. The problem with capital punishment of course is that governments can also have a little list... And they can't call on Al or me to do it for them either. (Been known to dodge a few salads myself you know.) |
|
21 Sep 12 - 06:46 AM (#3408155) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Jack Campin The population of America is over 300 million. What is the population of western Europe? 400 million. Not much excuse for the US having such a barbaric criminal justice system, whichever way you thought the answer was going to go. New Zealand's isn't as bad and neither is India's. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 04:24 AM (#3408577) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf "He asked me, "Now, in all sincerity, would YOU push that lever?" And I had to admit I couldn't have done so. He asked me why not, and it was because to take a life like that in cold blood seemed so obviously wrong. I have to add that the last British Executioner, Albert Pierrepoint, in his autobiography, came to the same conclusion, that hanging was no deterrent, that it was pointless and wrong, and he had no regrets that it had been abolished." 1) Yes I would. 2) Entirely false argument. In fact, absolute bollocks. The primary purpose of ANY sentence for ANY crime is punishment, not deterrent. Deterrence is a nice side effect IF it works, but is nothing to do with crime & punishment whatsoever. Consider this: a crime is either impulsive or pre-meditated. It's a bit difficult to fall between two stools on that one, from the theoretical point of view, yes? If it's impulsive, you're hardly likely to be considering the possible consequences of the crime; if it's pre-meditated, YOU'RE PLANNING ON NOT GETTING CAUGHT!! So, sum & total, deterrence only works on those who wouldn't seriously consider committing the crime in the first place. As for "vile", the problem with "America's" justice system (acknowledging that it is largely down to individual states) is not that it sentences people to death (which is not murder, folks, unless you choose not to make a distinction between an individual gratifying their own desires, and the state making a reasoned decision based on all the available evidence). It is that it allows these long drawn out sagas to occur. Fat Man should have been excuted within a year, unless there was any reason not to. If there was, the execution should have been stayed. I'm aware that lots of you will now jump on "reason" and start nit-picking. My point is that the process should have defined limits. In this case, they guy admitted the cold-blooded killing. So there's NO reason, except your squeamish morals which very many people don't share, not to execute. If, after having stayed it & 3 years have passed since sentencing, you can't find a cast-iron reason to execute, then the sentence should be commuted to life. What is obscene or vile about the process is the open-endedness of it. Either execute or commute; don't let it drag on year after year. But, as some in this thread have acknowledged, there are some who deserve to die. And states (in the sense of nations) have a responsibility & a duty to make those sorts of decisions. With hindsight, I will happily agree that, 40 years ago, whilst I would have said that they were right, they often would not have been (the Guildford Four & the Birmingham Six spring to mind). In this day & age, the level of scrutiny & outcry is so great I think, on probability, we would see very few "innocent" executions. I am English, not American. I would, given current standards of evidence & process, support the re-introduction of capital punishment to the UK, given an appropriate process of of chaecks & safeguards. Dale Cregan, anyone? |
|
22 Sep 12 - 04:48 AM (#3408581) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Stu No. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 05:10 AM (#3408588) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza Raedwolf, I'm sorry you find my opinion 'absolute bollocks'. And no, I would definitely not support the re-introduction of the death penalty in UK. Kindest regards, Eliza. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 07:23 AM (#3408618) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Raedwolf. If you are British, the penal system you are a stakeholder in is deterrent, rehabilitation and protecting society from dangerous people. The punishment is itself an equal factor. There are no side effects. If you feel murder is justified, I suggest you piss off to a country where such views are tolerated? Be careful, even those countries occasionally examine their conscience. On a lighter note, if you can be too obese to execute, The USA will abolish it through stealth eventually. Keep chomping the hamburgers and aerosols of cheese guys! |
|
22 Sep 12 - 07:34 AM (#3408622) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Raedwolf said nothing about murder being justified, Musket. If you think judicial execution, whatever one may think of its ethics or its effectiveness, is to be morally equated with the criminal offence of murder, then you are, to put this as politely as possible, disingenuous and misguided. I do not consider Eliza's objections to be in any way deficient; but I consider your position unworthy of what I presume you to regard as your intellect. ~M~ |
|
22 Sep 12 - 08:54 AM (#3408641) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Stu One assumes that to support the death penalty, you would be willing to carry it out yourself (if you wouldn't, then that suggests a fundamental lack of integrity). If that is the case, whether the state sanctions the killing or not at the end of the day you would have to knowingly, in cold blood, kill another human being. You might be able carry such an action out, I don't know. In all honesty, I would not stoop to killing another human being in such a fashion. After all, what makes the executioner different from the person they're executing? A seal and a squiggle on a bit of paper from some judge who will never have to kill that person themselves? Are you that easily persuaded? Or is it intent - it's OK to kill someone of the intention is to punish them (providing you have the seal and squiggle). Sounds more than a tad uncivilised to me. Or perhaps the best way forward is not to stoop so low as to kill some of the people who have wronged us, but lock them up for the rest of their lives. That way they are being punished, if there is doubt, mistakes or corruption in the case they won't be dead when this is discovered. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 09:55 AM (#3408654) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Are you a vegetarian, SJ? If not, would you slaughter your own animals? Or would you work as a prison officer supervising the confinement of those you are so cheerfully willing to lock up for the rest of their lives? Or are you a pacifist? Have you ever had to do any form of military service? If too young, think yourself lucky. It was very boring. But, if you had been required, would you have tried to get out of it in case of being expected to fight at some stage? Your argument is fatuous. People have their own jobs to do. What suits one will not suit another. You are being as stupidly disingenuous as old Musket above. ~M~ |
|
22 Sep 12 - 12:34 PM (#3408716) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Eliza - it is not your opinion, it is your argument. You are as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine! But your argument is bad. Musket. Well, I could just tell you to piss off too, couldn't I? Since I'm English, where exactly do you expect me to piss off to? This is my country too. On the other hand, maybe you'll read M's post & be a bit less careless in your reading in future. Murder is never justified. I don't regard state-sanctioned execution as murder, if the system is properly designed. Which I already more-or-less said. So you can... ;-) As to the question of deterrence, I maintain my previous stance. It IS *ALWAYS* lugged into any argument about crime & punishment. It doesn't matter whether the debate is about murder or shoplifting. Someone will ALWAYS bring it up. It is an entirely false qunatity. The question for the justice system and for the court and for the judge & jury is not "How do we stop people arriving here". That is a question for society and for government. The question is "What do we do with the ones that end up here?" That is a matter of punishment, gentle or otherwise. Deterrence is an irrelevance. Being gratuitously flippant, the re-offending rate after CP IS zero... ;-) Jack - Yes, I would be willing. I wouldn't regard it as stooping. I would regard it as unpleasant and necessary. And, I had this argument with my dear old (dead) dad a long time back, if I were wrongly on the wrong end of a death penalty, I would go to the gallows / chair / whatever crying my innocence. But I still wouldn't argue that CP was wrong. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 01:08 PM (#3408728) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,CupOfTea with no cookies One has to wonder if their reticence to try to execute this guy by injection is partially due to the amount of pentobarbital they'd have to use. Recent reports are that their supply is running low, and the pharmaceutical company refuses to provide any more for executions. I've followed several death row last minute stays & reversals from following Ohio anti-death penalty friends and associates & reporting their news. It's scary to hear how some of the death row residents have been wrongly accused and convicted - not "just technicalities" but serious breaches of due process, seemingly willful. Part of my background has me saying "hang the guilty!!!!" but I'm seeing how easy it is for the innocent to be found guilty, particularly if poor. As a poor Ohioan, I believe my chances of being found guilty of something I didn't do much higher than a rich Republican's chances. I can't come to lobby against the death penalty entirely, while willingly lobbying against it in SPECIFIC cases. I suppose that makes me wishy-washy in some views, but what else happens when you re-assess an opinion or your opinion evolves? Joanne in Cleveland (so far only guilty in housing court for having a big dead tree in the yard) |
|
22 Sep 12 - 01:22 PM (#3408735) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Lizzie Cornish 1 "Your all-too-frequent blanket condemnations of whole groups of people for the offenses of a few grow tiresome, display your ignorance of that which you condemn, and are the hallmark of the bigot." Oh, feck, Don... Your pedantics drive me nuts... Sorry, but the American Justice System DOES stink, mainly BECAUSE it is NOT ONE SYSTEM! Therefore, it is WIDE open to terrible abuse, which happens, a LOT. I'm well aware that different states have different systems, good gawd, I've been following the care of Leonard Peltier for ages! I mean WHAT kind of country has different rules in different places for heaven's sake! America wants to wake up and wake up it's Justice System too... And sorry, but those who think that a man being in prison for near on 30 years, under threat of death throughout that time, isn't punishment enough, wanting to seemingly bay for more, the 'more' being his death, have more cruelty in their soul than perhaps they're aware of. If there is 100% proof that someone has killed someone, as in murdered, then I can understand harsh penalties being brought in, but there are many different types of and reasons for murder, so the death penalty wouldn't fit all. I most definitely think the mass murderer of Norway should no longer be on the planet, for a start... Bigots R Us surround me, Don, but I am have no inhaled their Foul Breath or Black Souls.... I have no respect for the U.S. Justice System...nor for the FBI, whlist we're on the subject.... |
|
22 Sep 12 - 03:00 PM (#3408769) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: frogprince As to the individual referred to initially: It's just as well he wasn't scheduled for the electric chair. They would have had to put something around him to keep the fat from sizzling aand spattering all over. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 03:59 PM (#3408792) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf "Sorry, but the American Justice System DOES stink, mainly BECAUSE it is NOT ONE SYSTEM!" So, in essence, there isn't an American Justice System. In which case, A) why refer to one, B) wouldn't not referring to one make your argument more focused, and also less likely to draw gratuitously annoyed, and irrelevant, responses? Just a thought... ;-) |
|
22 Sep 12 - 05:10 PM (#3408812) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu Raedwulf... eloquence and logic. Even tho you are not the only such poster, thanks. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 08:57 PM (#3408873) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Little Hawk How about "too stupid to execute"? We could have a whole new thread just about that. |
|
22 Sep 12 - 09:11 PM (#3408875) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert How about, "don't execute"??? B~ |
|
22 Sep 12 - 09:35 PM (#3408877) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Little Hawk I'm very much in favor of not executing people, Bobert. I think it's extremely unwise to give any government the legal authority to kill people they are holding as prisoners. It's too easy to abuse such authority, it's too easy to make mistakes, and it's a wrongful thing to do anyway in the first place. (There are certain situations that push our buttons...where we want to see someone killed over something. That feeling can come over anyone in some particular situation. It's an individual emotional reaction. I don't think it's the proper business of a government to act as the agent to satisfy that kind of gut emotional reaction in people.) |
|
22 Sep 12 - 09:41 PM (#3408880) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert Yup. there are situations where we might want someone dead it's for civilized people to "just say no"... B~ |
|
22 Sep 12 - 11:21 PM (#3408900) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Don Firth By the way, Lizzie, if you "find the American Justice System to be one of the most vile in the world," then I'd say you haven't been around much. Don Firth |
|
23 Sep 12 - 01:23 AM (#3408917) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion "there are situations where we might want someone dead it's for civilized people to "just say no"..." Bobert, 2 posts back .,,.,.., This emotive use of the word 'civilised' constantly crops up on all the [many] threads on this topic. As I have remarked here before, it is unfairly used with the utmost tendentiousness. 'Civilisation' as a concept goes back to the ancient Egyptians and Mesapotamians in the Western World, to ancient India, China, Japan, &c, farther east. Capital punishment in some form was part of every one of these societies: its justice and probity were not even questioned till extremely recently [late C19 at earliest]. So are users of this word in this emotive and tendentious fashion really denouncing the Greeks, Romans, Hebrews, Chinese [cont p 94] as uncivilised? Don't be so silly. ~M~ |
|
23 Sep 12 - 04:41 AM (#3408948) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Having had a think, and even used my "intellect" as it has just been called, I stand by everything I said. Murder is murder and being state sanctioned does not make any difference. If you live in The UK and support the death penalty you are someone I have contempt for. Perhaps you may wish to correspond with Norman Tebbit and Richard Littlejohn. One has such views and the other is paid to have them. You'll get on fine. Perhaps get Anne Widdecombe to put the kettle on whilst you dream of weighing sacks, rope oil and final visits by the condemned's innocent family. And then perhaps set up a party to get elected on your sensationalist issue. You may even be able to draw a few members from mainstream right wing unelectable parties. You at least wouldn't need to pay G4 to protect you at your conferences as you would have enough skin heads in your party to provide it in house. I reckon I may have just about put my point over? |
|
23 Sep 12 - 05:32 AM (#3408950) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion 'Murder is murder and being state sanctioned does not make any difference...I reckon I may have just about put my point over?' .,,. Yes indeed ~~ the point that you are a Humpty Dumpty: "When I use a word, it means what I choose it to mean" (Through the Looking Glass). "Murder" is a LEGAL CONSTRUCT & CONCEPT. It has a precise meaning in law: a fact which all your twisting and turning and equivocating will not alter one jot. If you imagine it does so, to your own satisfaction in your own mind, then we are back at the question of the deficiencies in your intellect again. Now load that in your musket and shoot it; or put it in your intellect and ponder it... ~M~ |
|
23 Sep 12 - 07:42 AM (#3408981) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket Yes, I have. Murder is the taking of a life without consent, premeditated as opposed to by accident. Most civilised laws go on to say that they cannot see where such consent could ever be given, ergo if the UK government sanctioned a kill, as fans of James Bond may wonder if we ever do, it would be murder. Military actions by rules of engagement specify where taking of lives to save lives can be justified, but coroner reports on soldiers still call "killed in action" an act of homicide. I don't choose to use that term, although I am sure a legal sparrow such as Bridge would put a bit of polish on the interpretation. As we do not have the death penalty, I can sit at my keyboard in The UK and say that state execution is murder because where I sit it is. And where my moral compass ever sits, it still is. Just because a state defines what murder is doesn't alter its obligation to not commit it. After all, in democracies, governments are often taken to either court or judicial review over breaking their own laws. Come on, MtheGM. I haven't hitherto spoken of deficiencies in your intellect, despite the mounting evidence in your posts. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 08:11 AM (#3408986) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Jack the Sailor murder noun 1. Law . the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder). There you go, argument settled. It is not murder unless the law says it is. State sanctioned execution is not murder. I am not saying that it is moral or right. But it is not murder. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 08:40 AM (#3408994) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish >>>By the way, Lizzie, if you "find the American Justice System to be one of the most vile in the world," then I'd say you haven't been around much.<<< First of all, ask Leonard Peltier about the American Justice System..and then, read my words in a more pedantic manner and see if you can spot the words 'one of' whilst figuring out the meaning... Thanks |
|
23 Sep 12 - 09:54 AM (#3409006) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Arkie Sounds like the prison officials are trying to bloat him to death. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 10:29 AM (#3409014) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket Hello Sailor! It is murder if the state sanctions it. We are not speaking of less civilised ex colonies here, we have gravitated in the debate to apply it to those countries advanced enough to have laws that stand the test of decent civilisation. Mudcat is an international site so it is relevant for us all to see how such debates pan out in each other's structures. So you may have settled it in those states that are still playing catch up with the more mature ones, but the mini debate within the debate here is about 1st world countries, i.e., those that do not murder their citizens by judicial means. Anyway, if you wish to use dictionary terms, OED please, and then edits since The UK matured and stop killing its citizens "legally." Your man Webster is someone our scholars use as a case study in how to abuse status by what MtheGm unwittingly calls the Lewis Carroll method. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 10:46 AM (#3409018) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion I call it nothing of the sort, Musket. Whence you get that? And what do you mean by 'unwittingly', precisely? Impugn my intellect all you like: my withers will remain unwrung. In such cases one just leaves it to fellow-catters to judge the 'intellectual' battle. It's a free country; so you can call things what you like, but it doesn't turn them into what they are not. If you want to call a Cadbury's Fruit & Nut Bar a Big·Mac, there is no rule to stop you; but it won't taste any different. And you can likewise call judicial capital punishment 'murder' until you are blue in the face; but that won't transform it into murder in any meaningful (as distinct from tendentiously emotive) sense whatever, to anyone but your goodself. ~M~ |
|
23 Sep 12 - 10:49 AM (#3409019) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion And do please not that our disagreement is neither moral nor legalistic ~~ I am unsure where I stand on cap-pun and have no dogmatic views on it ~~ but purely semantic. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 11:24 AM (#3409029) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Well, I was going to say you're as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine, but "If you live in The UK and support the death penalty you are someone I have contempt for" & all the rest of it. Fuck you, you narrow-minded, patronising prig. You're an asshole. You make shallow, facile judgements, knowing nothing about my politics, most of which are left of centre. I don't deal in contempt, but I now have no respect either for you personally, or for your ability to construct a rational argument because, basically, all you can do is stick your fingers in your ears & yell your own opinions as though they were incontrovertible fact. Which they ain't. Muppet. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 11:55 AM (#3409042) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza Raedwulf, Michael and I differ on this particular subject, but nonetheless I feel I must object to your choice of language and vituperative attack on him in your last post. 'F*** you, you narrow-minded, patronising prig...' is not the way to disagree with someone. It's abusive and unpleasant, and completely uncalled-for, as was your dismissal of my argument as 'absolute bollocks'. I don't think Mudcat is the place for this sort of invective. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 01:18 PM (#3409079) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Your views, unless you are talking to yourself are how they are perceived. As you have stated your support for state murder, you cannot be perceived as left of centre. Right wing reactionary maybe. But never left of centre. I perceive myself as living there yet some on this bullshit section of Mudcat reckon I am a dirty rotten stinking capitalist. It's how you are perceived that counts. As I retire to my counting house to count my money, I walk and wonder if they have a point? Maybe they do. Too minted to give a shit. Which is why you too should have a drink and not get so het up when your appalling comments are commented upon as if were. If you don't want to be compared to those whom share your views, perhaps you shouldn't express them. I love winding people up but on this subject I have views that are polarised and embedded. As capital punishment is not legal in The UK, carrying it out would fit the penal code definition of murder. Not even MTheMG and his (on this subject) weird logic could change my view on that statement. I don't have his Lewis Carroll approach as he reckons I have, I use UK definitions. Shooting the messenger isn't the best way to debate. And neither is the wonderful name calling. Any more in your head? Hopefully the elves will let you get them out of you system. I may even have a giggle myself. (I reckon I am God's gift to women but others may percieve otherwise. A big like thinking you are left of centre, when defending the more odious right wing views.) By heck, this Pinot is as good as any I have had. It's all about perspective really. Happy enough to wind up idiots or shallow enough to get upset by pretend people on a pretend Internet. Zzzzzzzzz |
|
23 Sep 12 - 01:22 PM (#3409083) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Little Hawk No place is the place for that sort of invective. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 02:28 PM (#3409113) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie No place for speaking in favour of murder from where I am slowly slumping |
|
23 Sep 12 - 03:36 PM (#3409138) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion As capital punishment is not legal in The UK, carrying it out would fit the penal code definition of murder.··· .,,. What a strange piece of logic in relation to your previous statements. If it were again made legal, would you then cease this idiotic locution of yours? I suspect not ~~ you seem to apply it without reservation to any place where the practice of cap-pun persists. You are foolish and your arguments frivolous ~~ lartgely because you are semantically ineffectual, like HumptyDumpty. Another of my favourite literary references:- In Jane Austen's Sense & Sensibility, Elinor Dashwood, faced by the fatuities of Mr Ferrars the Elder, 'made no reply as she did not consider him to deserve the compliment of rational opposition'. I believe you, Musket, to have demonstrated yourself to be too stupid to deserve the compliment of rational opposition, so I have said my last words to you. Bluster all you will in return; I shall read no more of your posts. Adieu. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 03:47 PM (#3409142) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: CET Bill D asked "The question is, do we prevent this ONLY by banning all executions, or is there some way to allow it in cases where there is NO doubt, as in mass murder on video, or with multiple witnesses and a confession?... (Batman shootings in theater.)" The answer is "no". As I tried to explain in an earlier post, there are guilty findings and not guilty findings. There is nothing else. Using the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and there is no other standard, the courts in democratic countries like Canada, the U.S, and Britain get it right most of the time. But not all the time, and the mistakes are not as infrequent as we would all like to believe. I respect those, like Eliza, who have a moral revulsion to capital punishment. I share that revulsion, too, in most cases, but there are some murderers whom I hardly recognize as being human. For example, if Canada still had the death penalty, I simply would not have it in me to feel any regret at removing Russell Williams, who , once held the same commission that I do, from this world. However, I would still hate the death penalty and would do everything I could to abolish it. The price of being able to kill people like Russell Williams is the execution of innocent people like Guy-Paul Morin and Timothy Evans. You cannot have one without the other. In Guy-Paul Morin's case, there was no death penalty and he lived to be exonerated. Tim Evans was not so lucky. Sometimes pro-death penalty advocates are proud to say that they could pull the lever on (insert name of vile murderer here). And maybe they honestly believe that. That is not the real question, though. The question they ought to ask themselves is "Could I pull the lever on this killer, and then could I go on to pull the lever on all the other convicted killers, knowing for an absolute certainty that some of them will be innocent?" Raedwulf's views are interesting, since he seems to be one of the extraordinarily rare people who accept that wrongful executions are a product of régimes that allow the death penalty, but still support capital punishment. Mostly, pro-death penalty opinion doesn't get beyond "everybody knows the fucker did it and he deserves to die". Raedwulf's views would not have been unusual a generation or two ago. Now, after so many wrongful convictions over so many years, I don't understand how anybody continues to think that way. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 05:57 PM (#3409170) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie As the person this is replying to is not reading my posts I suggest instead of reading the following, you get a beer instead. Murder is murder. Killing someone either haunts your conscience forever or you have a personality disorder. I live in a country that recognises this. Has done for almost 50 years. State approved murder is still murder and was when our law allowed hanging. The definition of murder never gave a waiver for execution, but judges, governors and hangmen were licenced in effect to kill. It was still fucking murder. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 06:24 PM (#3409186) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf "It's abusive and unpleasant" - so was his personal attack on me, Eliza, which is why I decided I couldn't be bothered to play nice any more. Oh, and his response was more or less what I expected. Patronising, ignorant, smugly self-satisified. "you cannot be perceived as...", no, YOU, Musket, are incapable of perceiving... As I've already told you, you know nothing whatsoever about me or my politics. But it doesn't stop you sneering, trying to stick a label on, & committing ad hominem so that you can dismiss without actually having to take the trouble to make a real argument (something I suspect you are incapable of doing anyway). "As capital punishment is not legal in The UK, carrying it out would fit the penal code definition of murder. Not even MTheMG and his (on this subject) weird logic could change my view on that statement." You really are a chump. If capital punishment was legal it wouldn't be murder, would it? It'd be capital punishment. Since it isn't legal, it doesn't happen. Talk about stupid, self-serving, circular argument. Not bothering to respond to you any more because you're evidently only interested in your own point of view. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 08:09 PM (#3409214) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu Raedwulf.... please don't leave FOR GOOD. You are one of the few that offers logical arguements for discussion and provides logical and factual discussions of other poster's arguements. As far as the "fuck you" goes, I know how you feel. Fact is, I get BEYOND upset when someone puts words in my mouth. And, many times I post "gnightgnu" but I always reserve the right to rejoin the thread, especially if someone addresses me or my posts after I leave. Unfortunate that many posters stray from what is actually posted... even in THEIR posts. Oh, yeah, almost forgot... re Leonard Peltier, he is enduring cruel and not so unusual punishment. Found guilty of murder beyond a shadow of a doubt (an officer he shot IDd him as the shooter on his death bed), he was sentenced to life in prison (2 counts) and I think he should have been hanged because apparently he doesn't like being in prison. It IS cruel. |
|
23 Sep 12 - 08:59 PM (#3409220) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: CET No, Leonard Peltier was not found guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt. He was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the same as every one else who has ever been found guilty of anything, whether it's tax evasion or murder. I don't know anything about the case beyond the name, so I'm not saying it wasn't a righteous conviction, but enough of this bullshit that there is something in law "called beyond the shadow of a doubt." Yes, in logical terms there are some murderers for whom there really is no doubt. Anders Breivik is the most notorious one in the last couple of years. If Norway had the death penalty, they could hang him in absolute certainty that they had the right man. Unfortunately, the law has no way of separating Breivik and ilk from the ones who later turn out to be innocent. And no Musket, capital punishment is not and never was murder. Murder is unlawful killing. Murder is a legal term, not a moral one. Capital punishment is morally wrong, but it is not murder. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 01:04 AM (#3409283) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Raedwulf & CET ~~ No good pointing out these facts to someone like poor old Muskyboos, who is clearly one of those whose watchword is "My mind is made up: do not confuse me with facts". I noticed on another thread that he has a doctorate. Wonder what in. Presumably called a Doctorate of Philosophy from some institute somewhere that passes as a university [ie these days, about every 3rd building in the realm]; but I have rarely come across anyone so incapable of grasping the most elementary elements of any concept of philosophy in any sense. ~M~ |
|
24 Sep 12 - 03:16 AM (#3409306) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Sorry. If it helps, I shall stop quoting from law and find some other text that may ease the conscience of those offended by people who think their views abhorrent. If you look at the legal definition of murder, or at least as applies to England and Wales, though I suspect Scotland and Northern Ireland are similar, there is and never has been any clause saying capital punishment was exempt. It just sets out that premeditated taking of a human life is murder. No mention of "unless the sentencing clauses allow" or even "taking the life of combatants in theatre of war ". It does say elsewhere that those who take (or took) a life shall not be culpable under certain circumstances. Just quoting the law. Would those who love a good execution prefer I find a false but comforting definition instead? After all, we can't have you thinking hard and long about your hitherto take on society and how to deal with matters. Perhaps a long and boring debate on the difference between retribution and revenge may help. Doubt it but you never know. I make no apology whatsoever for taking the moral high ground on this. I enjoy some of the bullshit debates on this forum but some topics demonstrate that mankind still has a long way to go. Mark Twain was right when he said that man is the only animal that can blush, or needs to. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 06:46 AM (#3409348) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Sorry mate, it's a real one. I admit to having no grasp of understanding why state murder isn't the same as any other when even UK law seems to agree with stance. A stance by the way which was described in a legal briefing when something similar was being explained, that of the legal aspects of assisted suicide. I haven't made my mind up on anything. Just stating a few facts. If those facts don't fit, don't shoot the messenger. The only bit regarding my mind is a healthy contempt for those whom would advocate state murder, capital punishment call it what you will. The result is a stiff cold body and grieving mothers all the same. We lock our prisoners away from society. Seems a good choice to me. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 08:14 AM (#3409375) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert Comes down to the issue of "sanctity of lfe"... Kinda hard to sell the concept by killing someone... And 100... B~ |
|
24 Sep 12 - 08:23 AM (#3409378) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: John MacKenzie 100 tons? |
|
24 Sep 12 - 11:04 AM (#3409421) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza During my years as a Prison Visitor, I dealt with many serious offenders (not murderers) and often questioned the remit and purpose of the legal system in UK. It seems to consist of several issues; punishment, deterrent, rehabilitation, vengeance, safety of the Public etc. Many Prison Officers I chatted to said they felt the system itself wasn't sure what the purpose of prison actually was. Some felt the inmates should be locked up and the key thrown away. Some felt the lads had had a bad start and needed understanding. Some tried very hard to help and rehabilitate their charges. All agreed that the Public had a nice break while the robbers etc were behind bars, and most felt that no-one had been deterred from offending by the penalties. Now most of this could be applied as questions about what to do with murderers, and why. Obviously execution removes the danger forever. But so would a life sentence. Are murderers mentally ill in some way and need treatment? (as in Broadmoor) Is vengeance the main drive behind the death sentence, and is this justified? Can a murderer change and become safe to release? Has a man's background turned him into a killer through no fault of his own? I don't believe even the most ardent supporters of execution have the answers, as not enough research has ever been done. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 12:54 PM (#3409463) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Back to the bloke too obese to execute ... (Bored with educating pork, back to the subject) That statement alone, too obese to execute, is testament to the need for The USA states that advocate state killing to look at why. Is the crime any different? Is the moral argument any different? Just makes execution in a land of intelligent people look all the more bizarre. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 02:13 PM (#3409501) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Wesley S Remember that the folks who claim that the man to too obese to execute are the condemned mans lawyers. I'll be surprised if the state agrees with them. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 04:39 PM (#3409558) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Argh. I did write you an answer yesterday, CET, but the board seems to have eaten it. Beyond a shadow of a doubt is exactly the level of proof I'd expect to be in place before a death sentence could be signed off. It isn't the level of proof that's required in the US. That's a fault in the system. It isn't necessarily an argument that CP is inherently wrong. If anyone wants to tell me that CP is handled badly in the US, I'll whole-heartedly agree! Why I believe that you could create a viable environment for CP as a sentence these days is precisely because of all those wrongful convictions. As I've already acknowledged, 40 years ago "If I ruled the world", I'd have consigned a lot of people to an early death for crimes they did not commit. I don't know how many; 5%, 10%? Some of them were quite likely guilty of other crimes for which they were not convicted. But, on balance, yes, the justice system in the west has changed. There is far more oversight of process, and far less room for abuse now. As you yourself acknowledge, is there any doubt over the guilt of Anders Breivik? No, none. What about Dale Cregan? So far, in advance of a trial I admit, there seems to be none. Peter Sutcliffe? Whether or not insanity is grounds for not executing is another argument (one on which I have no opinion before Someone leaps in with both feet), but his guilt is beyond any doubt, yes? And that's the point. "Reasonable doubt" is sufficient to secure a conviction; it isn't sufficient to sign a death penalty. I spoke earlier of "checks & safeguards". You can never guarantee a watertight system, but I think there's something wrong with a system that is frightened of ever being wrong. If that's the case, you might as well demolish all the jails, because there's plenty of wrongful convictions inside right now! "...most felt that no-one had been deterred from offending by the penalties. Now most of this could be applied as questions about what to do with murderers, and why. Obviously execution removes the danger forever. But so would a life sentence." We agree on something then, Eliza. I've already made exactly the same point about the alleged deterrent effect of sentences. Unfortunately, I can't agree about "life sentence". First as we all know, "life" rarely means that. Second, if it does actually mean that ("Whole life tariff" is the expression, isn't it?), then what's the point of it? Is the prisoner serving some kind of object lesson? We're back to deterrence, which I think we agree is a non-starter. In actual fact, such a prisoner is as likely to be lionised by other inmates as anything (think Charles Bronson, here). If we have just said that we are so certain that you're guilty that we're never going to let you out... what do we gain by making you nothing but a burden on society for anything up to 60+ years? Third, it's only a matter of time before some lawyer starts arguing that "whole life tariff", by denying any hope of release, constitutes "cruel & unusual", and then we won't even be able to lock someone up for life either! As for you musket, damn. You almost sounded like a rational human being for a moment there. Then you said "pork" and showed yourself an asshole again. Incidentally, Eliza, you got your knickers in a twist over me using the F-word once. Count it. Once. When exactly are you going to condemn your pal Michael for his repeated & admitted attempts (feeble attempts, I grant you) to gratuitously insult posters whose arguments he dislikes? There's another word besides asshole for that sort of behaviour. Troll. Double standards on your part? Ironically, of course, to several of the posters in this thread, he gives the impression of being just the sort of narrow-minded bigot as the examples he tried to insult people with. Bet I can guess what Musket Tebbitt will say to that... |
|
24 Sep 12 - 05:12 PM (#3409572) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Which Michael that, Raed? Hope don't mean me. So please clarify. ~M~ |
|
24 Sep 12 - 05:17 PM (#3409573) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Eliza referred to a Michael earlier (I'm a Mike too, btw). In context, I assumed she meant The Biscuitless Misfiring Musket, since I hadn't been laying into you for being a {insert term of opprobrium of choice..} ;-) |
|
24 Sep 12 - 05:34 PM (#3409583) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Looking back ~~ I think she thought you were addressing me, as mine was the immediately preceding post to your vituperative one to which she was objecting: whereas yours was actually addressed, as I read it, to Musket, whose post just preceded mine. You didn't use a name, you see; just a 'you'... Probably a bit of cross-posting or some such? Oh, dear. Well, well; I am pacified, anyhow... I think! ~M~ |
|
24 Sep 12 - 05:51 PM (#3409594) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Everybody (except BiscuitlessBoy) may now have a quite snigger, whilst I enjoy a {facepalm} moment then! :o Crossed wires almost all round, it seems. Sorry to almost everyone for any confusion! :) |
|
24 Sep 12 - 05:54 PM (#3409596) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Hmmm... Not so sure which of us is a twit. I did actually quote Muppet in that post. Ah well, shall we call it a painful score draw, Eliza? ;-) |
|
24 Sep 12 - 07:33 PM (#3409653) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: CET The problem with "beyond the shadow of a doubt" as a legal standard is that it can never be applied in a real situation. In this country, possibly in yours too, judges instruct juries that it is not possible to determine facts to an absolute certainty. They can only be expected to apply the standard of beyond reasonable doubt. You cannot expect a judge or jury to determine whether a convicted killer is guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt, and therefore to be killed, when they have just finished convicting him. If there was any room for doubt in their minds they wouldn't, or shouldn't, have convicted him in the first place. You're right, no society can afford a justice system that is paralyzed by the fear of getting it wrong, but I can tell you that there are people in jail who did not commit any crimes. Police are human. They usually do their best, but sometimes they make mistakes, and occasionally they do worse. Sometimes they lie, fabricate evidence, and hide evidence from the defence. Most prosecutors are honourable, but sometimes they aren't. Sometimes they develop tunnel vision and will go to any length to secure a conviction. Most juries are true to their oaths, but sometimes they aren't. You will never develop a system that guarantees there will be no wrongful convictions, but at least if the prisoner is alive you can say you are sorry. On reflection, I owe Gnu an apology. I stand by everything I said, but I should have been less sharp in how I phrased it. My intention was to debate vigorously, but I can see how it came across as an attack. |
|
24 Sep 12 - 08:56 PM (#3409689) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert The issue of life is kinda strange... I mean, if "life" means "life" then that turns prisons into nursing homes... There's gotta be some sanity to "life"... Still a big no to killing folks... If they get to a point where they don't want to live any more then, hey, call Dr. Kavorkian... B~ |
|
25 Sep 12 - 02:59 AM (#3409771) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf I'm slightly puzzled, CET, as to why you think "shadow" cannot be as well defined as "reasonable"? Let's face it, "reasonable" itself is a pretty woolly definition. I accept that there may be no will to do so, but that doesn't make it impossible. "Shadow" isn't certainty. "Reasonable", to me, says I think he's guilty, but it's possible for there to be evidence that I don't know about (and therefore can't assess) that might change my view of the case. "Shadow" goes well beyond that, but isn't necessarily absolute certainty. There are very few absolutes, probably none, in the human world. On your checklist would be things such as weight of forensic evidence (fingerprints on the murder weapon, DNA, etc), independent eye-witness testimony, motive established, obviously fabricated defence from the accused (i.e. glaring inconsistencies), no reason to question police behaviour, and so on. Finally, no questions about the quality of the legal defence. An argument I've often seen in respect of American death row cases is that poor prisoners get rubbish lawyers (as far as I recall OJ got off because his lawyers went ad hominem against the police; not because they actually bothered to disprove the case). If enough of those boxes get ticked... There are very many cases where, despite it being on the statute book, CP should never be an option. Equally, and examples already given, there are cases where it should be. An option, you'll note; always an option, never a guaranteed outcome. Incidentally, as far as I'm concerned, sentencing is solely a matter for the judge; no jury of amateurs should ever have a say in the matter. I agree, you can't ever design a watertight system; I already said as much; but why expect one? People get killed every year because of mechanical failures in cars and other equipment. It's impossible to design a perfect machine, but we still design & sell machinery. There comes a point where the balance of probability says it's as safe as it can be made & safe enough that it's not unreasonable to make it available. I think the West could do that with CP now. Obviously you still don't, which is fair enough! Out of curiosity, are you morally against CP, as Bobert, or are you just not satisfied that the risk of a wrong sentence is sufficently low? For my part, Bob, whilst I generally have a great deal of respect for your views even though I often find myself disagreeing with them, I have to say that I dislike moral arguments. Your morals are not my morals, and what gives you the right to define MY life by YOUR morals? We're potentially into "killing because I insulted your holy book" territory with that way of thinking. I accept that you will always say that killing is wrong, whatever the circumstances, but do you have a rational, rather than a moral, argument as to why? |
|
25 Sep 12 - 03:14 AM (#3409775) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie I cannot be an asshole. I am British so therefore an arsehole. At least my insults have the benefit of a snug fitting cap. Now you have all cleared the air between yourselves, how about you now decide which of you polishes the straps, who weighs the prisoner and practices with sand bags and who, now we come to the exciting bit, gets to pull the lever! For everybody else, a snippet in this morning's Independent says that a recent USA survey found not a single death row inmate was on the Atkins diet. There's a thesis in that for someone with a sense of gallows humour. |
|
25 Sep 12 - 04:18 AM (#3409788) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza Raedwulf, Michael is not my 'pal'; I have never met the gentleman. As I am not a Mudcat referee, I do not count the use of the 'F' word and measure out criticism accordingly. I do however abhor abusive (and ultimately ineffectual) posts on what promised to be a most interesting and stimulating discussion. Finally, I do not discuss my knickers, twisted or otherwise, with anyone but my husband. |
|
25 Sep 12 - 04:30 AM (#3409790) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Ineffectual? I wouldn't say that. It seemingly got up Muppet's nose (the adults are talking, Muppet; be quiet & you might learn something. But I doubt it.). I also note, no attempt at clarifying who you thought I was having a go at and STILL a hypocritical failure to condemn Muppet's abusive behaviour. Either neither of us are in the wrong or both of us are. Which is it, or can't you bring yourself to say? I'd say your knickers were still twisted. |
|
25 Sep 12 - 04:33 AM (#3409791) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Eliza I expect you would. |
|
25 Sep 12 - 04:58 AM (#3409796) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Rob Naylor CET: The answer is "no". As I tried to explain in an earlier post, there are guilty findings and not guilty findings. There is nothing else. Using the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and there is no other standard Just a couple of points of fact here: In Scotland there is a "Not Proven" verdict, which is basically "we think (s)he did it but the required level of proof hasn't been reached". And there is also another standard of proof in common use in the UK, that of "on the balance of probabilities". OK, it's applied in less serious cases than murder, usually civil rather than criminal ones, but it exists, and the level of proof required is lower than for "reasonable doubt". |
|
25 Sep 12 - 05:35 AM (#3409807) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket And on a more serious note... People who support the idea of taking of a person's life don't get up my nose per se, I have too much faith in democracy for that to ever be a factor. You can keep your odious views and have every right to ask if anybody wants to join the crusade that you have embarked on with your mates Tebbit, Widdecombe and Littlejohn. However, you also said you are uncomfortable with moral arguments. I suppose you have good reason judging by your views on murder. Judging by other's morals is what courts do. if your own sense of morals were the deciding factor, nobody could ever be guilty as people with a personality disorder have such a condition because their morals are too far away from the norm. Supporting capital punishment is not in itself a personality disorder by any medical definition but should fit nicely ito the "keep it to yourself in polite company" end of the market. My morals are questionable, as are everybody else's. I don't advocate taking of a life though, so in my view, and happy to be labelled sanctimonious for this, on that at least I have the moral high ground that is normally reserved for bloody cyclists on public roads... |
|
25 Sep 12 - 03:28 PM (#3410061) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf So still not clarification, Eliza. That says one of two things. Either you thought I was having a go at GM, we got our wires crossed, and you're now too embarassed or too small-minded to accept the proffered olive branch. Or two, you're a screaming hypocrite, because you try to condemn me whilst failing to say a word about the behaviour that I reacted to. I don't care which. Either way, it's obviously a waste of time talking to you. It remains "a most interesting and stimulating discussion", at least between those that are capable of discussing. Oh, then there's Muppet. Dear Muppet, I went through this same routine several years ago with Shambles and with Gibbering Martian. However many times you ignore what I've posted, or deliberatly distort it, however many time you repeat "your mates are...", it doesn't make any of it true. It just makes you look an utter idiot. Especially when you flatly contradict yourself. "My morals are questionable, as are everybody else's" - mine apparently aren't. You've been labelling them with absolute certainty for some time. Finally, whilst I lack any belief that you'll actually pay any attention to this, I said I DISLIKE moral arguments, not that I'm uncomfortable with them. I dislike them because morals are an entirely self-referential & subjective point of view. I seek a rational debate; you seek to impose your views on me. I wouldn't call you call sanctimonious, I'd call you, have called you, a bigot because that is what you are. Just as much a bigot at Tebbitt et al; quite possibly more so. That moral high ground you claim? It's a muddy tussock much like the other muddy tussocks that we're all standing on in this same swamp. |
|
25 Sep 12 - 06:27 PM (#3410135) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: CET I was aware of the Scottish not proven verdict, but didn't mention it because it doesn't exist outside of Scotland. The balance of probabilities standard is not relevant to this debate because it does not apply to criminal offences, serious or otherwise. I know that the British government has done a lot to whittle down the protections that the common law used to give an accused person (the warning that British police give to suspects, and that makes me want to scream every time I watch a BBC detective show, springs to mind) but I hope they haven't gone that far. Raedwulf: that's not how criminal law works. "I think you're guilty" does not equal guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It means that the trier of fact (judge or jury) has a doubt and must acquit the accused. Only if the jury member can say "I am convinced that you are guilty because the evidence allows no other rational conclusion" can she properly vote to convict. Courts have wrestled with defining reasonable doubt. In Canada juries are instructed that it is much closer to absolute certainty than it is to proof on a balance of probabilities. Courts in other countries have tried different approaches, but it is pretty well universally accepted that the criminal standard of proof is much more demanding than "thinking" that someone is guilty. All the checks and balances you suggest to protect against wrongful executions are, or should be, involved at the stage of determining guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If the case for the prosecution can't withstand that level of scrutiny the accused is supposed to go free. That's why I said that once the accused has been found guilty, you cannot expect the judge to go on and impose an even higher standard of proof. Occasionally, before capital punishment was abolished, governments would intervene to commute a death penalty, but only rarely and they certainly did not save Tim Evans from the gallows. The possibility of a judge not allowing the death penalty once a jury has found the prisoner guilty doesn't give me any sense of reassurance. Judge Bullingham is only slightly fictional. As for whether I share Bobert's views, I do, but if I examine my conscience, I have to admit that in the very hard cases it is really my brain that makes me revolt against capital punishment more than my respect for the life of the killer. |
|
26 Sep 12 - 12:32 AM (#3410252) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion I have always thought the use of the word 'reasonable' something of an evasive and pusillanimous cop-out here. Anyone agree? Re Tim Evans: is it not at least an extreme likelihood that he acted in collusion with Christie, and so was not quite such a snow-white innocent as tradition {and Ewan!} would have us believe? ~M~ |
|
26 Sep 12 - 12:56 AM (#3410260) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Run a tube from his ass to his nose, and let him asphyxiate on his own flatulence!...He might even go out with a smile on his face....after all his fatness and fat ass would have done humanity a service!! GfS |
|
26 Sep 12 - 03:12 AM (#3410288) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie The debate isn't so much about him as about the person who greases the tube and inserts it. Here, you do seem to have a fixation with pushing things up people's bums? (See "gay marriage" thread passim). Raedwolf - the problem with your argument re morals may not be as clear cut as your support for killing people, although that alone is an indication of where our moral compasses point differently, no. The problem with your argument is that morals are subjective and in the eye of the beholder. Hence judges and juries to compare your stance with the "norm". And on that subject, I am satisfied I have a sink proof pontoon in your swamp and I am presently standing on it, high and muppetly dry. Must go. I have booked a lorry to sit me on the back riding through town flicking Vs at the poor people. |
|
26 Sep 12 - 07:00 PM (#3410680) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu MGM.... "I have always thought the use of the word 'reasonable' something of an evasive and pusillanimous cop-out here. Anyone agree?" Who would not? |
|
28 Sep 12 - 03:05 AM (#3411223) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf CET: Sorry, but I think that probably IS how criminal law works! Sorry, I'm a pragmatist. I have no legal experience, no legal training, I've never sat on a jury. But if you think that, despite whatever the judge might say, some of the jurors don't go "Ooooh! Look at him! He looks guilty", etc... You get my drift. I might know sod all about legal theory, but I flatter myself I know a bit about human nature! ;-) We're also splitting hairs & playing semantics rather. For me, "I think you're guilty" DOES mean beyond reasonable doubt. But I could also conceive of myself saying that, and still thinking that I was certain enough to convict someone, but not certain enough that they should die. I DO see a difference between "I am certain enough that you committed the crime to convict you" and "I am not certain enough to impose a death penalty". Compare the Breivik case, where there is absolutely no doubt about who was doing the killing, and a recent case in the UK where a family was convicted of murdering their daughter, Shafilea Ahmed. The evidence was strong enough to secure convictions of both parents, yet there remain several versions of events, and the possibility that the conviction of one or both parents could be incorrect. I consider myself fairly intelligent (IQ tests usually register @140, for whatever that is worth!), extremely rational, and without any particular cultural biases. I am also too aware that my fellow jurors are likely to not be all, or even any, of those things. That's precisely why I make the point that only judges should be passing sentence. The possibility of a judge not allowing the death penalty once a jury has found the prisoner guilty doesn't bother me in the slightest. No crime has an automatic penalty at present and, as far as I am aware, in the UK the jury never recommends a sentence. If that happens elsewhere, as you'll gather, I'd simply remove it from the process. The jury's role is solely to weigh up the evidence & render verdict accordingly. MGM & gnu - as already noted, I think "reasonable" is a bit of a woolly defintion, aye. |
|
28 Sep 12 - 06:05 AM (#3411273) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket Many crimes have automatic penalties. Granted, you can appeal them, but you can also appeal court decisions. (Most Road Traffic Act violations have automatic penalties and many regulated services have criminal law penalties as well as civil ones.) Ok, I take into account your IQ is only 140, but even then, you still have this view that a death penalty could be acceptable. I fail to see that view as the considered view of an enlightened, educated, intelligent person. Hence I am far happier pointing and laughing at you, prodding you to get a reaction and noting the similarities between yourself and certain contemptible politicians and commentators on the far right of the political spectrum. if you don't like the comparison, don't ask for it. Criminal law is "beyond all reasonable doubt" whereas most civil actions are "on balance of probability." In either case, a reasonably clear cut argument must be made, and the distinction reflects the gravity of the consequences. If you feel that juries would normally use their prejudice as humans, you may reflect on that stance if you get called for jury service. The clue is normally in the summing up before retiring. Not the clue as to what to deliver, but the clue in what needs to be answered in order to deliver a guilty verdict. Judges may be lampooned as out of touch elite, but they normally know their role and know it well. |
|
28 Sep 12 - 06:16 AM (#3411277) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion you still have this view that a death penalty could be acceptable. I fail to see that view as the considered view of an enlightened, educated, intelligent person. .,,. This 'failure to see', Musket, is manifestly a failure in your intelligence, not in that of your interlocutors. If you cannot see this, then that fact merely reinforces the point. ~M~ Please note that, in saying this, I am far from lining myself up on the pro-CapPun side, on which I remain ambivalent; but merely on the side of at least an attempt at rationality rather than a surrender to intransigent head-in-sand prejudice of the sort that your assertion demonstrates. |
|
28 Sep 12 - 09:12 AM (#3411348) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Musket - I don't "ask" for any comparisons, or even comment, from you at all. Doesn't stop you offering them though, does it? Cite your "automatic" penalties if you want to. Bet it's trivial stuff like parking fines. Surprise! I don't think illegal parking warrants a death sentence! I was, implicitly, talking about serious offences in the reference to "automatic" i.e. Category A, B, and even C, crimes where a range of sentencing is always on offer (as far as I am aware), and I've certainly not alluded to anything that could be regarded as a civil case, so yet another dead (sic) herring you've introduced as a cheap & failed attempt to score something. Other than that, what MGM said. You might be educated (See? I don't jump to conclusions that suit my attempt at an argument, unlike you. Though I do indulge in sarcasm, and do it better than you, too), but there's little that you've posted here that displays intelligence, and much that displays a complete lack of enlightenment. Keep digging. Maybe you'll hit oil eventually. If your spade breaks (oh, sorry, should I have called it a shovel? Am I now going to be accused of racism?), let me know. I'll happily chuck another one down to you. I'll even try to make sure it misses you. You're still mildly amusing at the moment. Mea culpa, troll / bigot baiting is an occasional guilty pleasure. Cos that's all you are. I just can't decide whether you're both, or just a bigot... |
|
28 Sep 12 - 09:34 AM (#3411361) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Separately, because I'm trying to elicit a considered response, rather than knee-jerk sneering, have you ever served on a jury, Musket? I have already acknowledged I have not, but I do also believe I'm reasonably well versed in human nature. Many people are not very good at self-analysis, or recognising their own motives for making their decisions. CET said a jury member should be able to say "I am convinced that you are guilty because the evidence allows no other rational conclusion". I am not convinced that jury members do think that way. Being on a jury does not make them special, or change their natures. It might make them more cautious in more serious cases where a mistaken verdict would have more serious consequences (regardless of what verdict they give, or whether CP is an option under their laws). But does it change they way they think? I doubt it very much. Consider 12 Angry Men; I daresay you've seen it. It's a film, it's not real, and I doubt that one doubtful juror often persuades the other 11 round to their point of view. But I do think it offers a realistic perspective as to how people make their judgements. And in 12AM, even E.G.Marshall's character is rationally convinced of the accused's guilt, until Henry Fonda argues him out of it. No matter what a judge says; and as you might realise, I trust the judge to be consistent & rational far more than I do the jury; do we not all make judgements that are coloured by our upbringing & past experiences? I may think I'm more intelligent, more rational, and less biased than many other people, but I still know I'm damn well a product of my life so far! ;-) |
|
28 Sep 12 - 01:10 PM (#3411428) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket MtheGM. ?? Not agreeing with state murder is a sign of my lack of intelligence? Decrying people for views I feel not worthy of their intelligence is my lack of intelligence? Sorry, that's out of my league. I'll try and help though. NURSE! Our Saxon contributor; I enjoy the reference to Twelve Angry Men. I recall getting a book many years ago as a tie in to The BBC's The Goodies,, called The Goodies book of (criminal) Records. There is a page with spoof induction instructions for juries. No.1. Forget you ever saw Twelve Angry Men. I would agree that would be a realistic portrayal of how twelve people of the same character and outlook as those fictional parts would have made their judgement. I doubt twelve other people would do the same though. Any twelve. Nowt as queer as folk. Hence judges instructing a jury on salient facts presented. I have not served on a jury. I am used to presenting my case to a judge though, and also decide on summary judgements, although nothing exciting, just in my role as a regulator in a specific field. Got some post grad type pieces of paper in investigating, PACE and making judgements though if such thing impress you. They don't impress me all the same. I was dragged kicking and screaming onto the courses. If you are as you say intelligent, rational and less biased than many other people, how can you ever ever feel that the taking of a life is justified? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and from where I am sitting, you ain't coming over as an oil painting. Don't fall into the trap of feeling justified by the idiots above who seem to agree with you. Some just love an argument, some have no other reaction but to have an argument and sadly, some are what you might call a bit right wing.. Hence their views. if you feel you do not ask for my comparisons or comment, why the hell post anything in the first place? If you want to do some bigot baiting, look on the gay marriage thread, plenty of the buggers on that discussion. Some even reckon the title is an oxymoron. I am lots of things, ask a few ex girlfriends or even an ex wife. They'll feed you a few choice descriptions of me. But a bigot? I may insult you as a way of expressing my distaste of one particular view of yours, but insults do tend to exaggerate truths, and be blessed where I am being a bigot? I'm not even entrenched in any view there. Not wanting to murder people isn't a flexible stance, it should be hard wired. If by my stance I am judging others by my standards, then having distaste for murder is all of a sudden bigotry? Make sure you do not begin to sound like the dozy bugger defending you, whilst putting a rider that he doesn't agree with you... So. Do you really believe that a court should have power to take a life? Do you feel that those countries where their development has not reached that of the first world have a point? Is obesity a factor in deciding if someone should die or is their status as a human enough? |
|
16 Oct 12 - 07:41 PM (#3421020) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf I thought I wouldn't bother. And then I thought, sod it, I will. Nowt as queer as folk. At least there's something we can agree on! :-) I fear, 'tis mostly donwhill from here though... If you are as you say intelligent, rational and less biased than many other people, how can you ever ever feel that the taking of a life is justified? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and from where I am sitting, you ain't coming over as an oil painting. Shall we agree, then, that Chris Ofili has been doing our portraits? ;-) The difference is, of course, that I have been trying to attack your arguments, not you. Whilst you've been making precious little effort not to smear, sneer, and ad hominem everyone at every opportunity. Don't fall into the trap of feeling justified by the idiots above who seem to agree with you. Some just love an argument, some have no other reaction but to have an argument and sadly, some are what you might call a bit right wing. Frankly, I couldn't give a shit what anyone else thinks about anything. Why should I? However I have arrived at my OPINIONS, I have done so on the basis of what I believe to be rationality. I am open to argument. If someone presents evidence, I will consider it. But wherever I have an opinion NOW, it is a result of the evidence I have had available to me up to now. If there's good enough evidence, I will change my opinion on whatever. You haven't offered me anything, so I haven't changed my mind. And, as I am thoroughly apolitical, as I mistrust all politicians, I couldn't give a damn about right or left wing. As it happens, there is a very good political test on the net; you can find it on this site, http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2. It is based on an x,y axis; not just just x. You can be socialist or capitalist, but you can also be authoritarian or libertarian. It might surprise you to know that every time I have taken the test I come out slightly SW - a left wing libertarian. But not a close-minded one, as you seem to be. if you feel you do not ask for my comparisons or comment, why the hell post anything in the first place? If you want to do some bigot baiting, look on the gay marriage thread, plenty of the buggers on that discussion. I don't "feel", I didn't "ask"; YOU chose to make a comparison. It wasn't invited. As to why I post, well, it's a forum isn't it? Where open discussion is acceptable, even encouraged. I'm just glad you're not a MudElf, because freedom of speech would, seemingly, be rather curtailed... But a bigot? I may insult you as a way of expressing my distaste of one particular view of yours, but insults do tend to exaggerate truths, and be blessed where I am being a bigot? I'm not even entrenched in any view there. Not wanting to murder people isn't a flexible stance, it should be hard wired. If by my stance I am judging others by my standards, then having distaste for murder is all of a sudden bigotry? Yes, you are a bigot. Your expressed opinion amounts to "If you disagree with me, you are wrong". Instead of "Capital punishment is wrong" subsitute "All niggers / Jews / racial grouping of your choice are..." whatever (deliberately provocative vocabulary, by the way). I think you're entitled to your opinion. I don't sneer at you for holding it, I don't agree with you either. But you sneer at me and, it seems, you cannot accept that my opinion is valid & rational. That's bigotry - "obstinately convinced of the superiority or correctness of one's own opinions and prejudiced against those who hold different opinions". That's the OED definition of bigoted. I'd say that's you down to a T. So. Do you really believe that a court should have power to take a life? Do you feel that those countries where their development has not reached that of the first world have a point? Is obesity a factor in deciding if someone should die or is their status as a human enough? Yes, I do believe that a court should etc. I also think that many countries that do have a death penalty don't have a sufficiently rigorous system of justice to go with it. First world or third world is beside the point. As is obesity. You're sneering again, but I'm not. Obesity is irrelevant; is the guilt beyond any doubt? That's the only relevant point. Even when you're asked a question civilly, you still can't remain polite. That says a lot about you. But I'll ask you another one. It is estimated to cost £40K to keep a prisoner in jail for a year in the UK. You tell us that you're a doctor, Ian Mather. What could you do, professionally, with an extra £40K a year? How many people could you help? How much difference could you make to people's lives with another £40K? Finally, I note that what I predicted 20-odd years ago has come to pass. Prisoners with whole-life tariffs are going to the European Court claiming that that amounts to cruel & inhuman punishment. So we can't execute them, and we can't jail them for "life means life" either (I don't doubt that the appeal will eventually be won, if not for these prisoners, then for others in the future). What is your solution for them, Musket? |
|
17 Oct 12 - 01:53 AM (#3421106) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Oh well: now we're back ~~ "MtheGM. ?? Not agreeing with state murder is a sign of my lack of intelligence?" Didn't say that -- tho, once again, the emotively tendentious & inaccurate use of word 'murder' here does in fact redound to that view. "Decrying people for views I feel not worthy of their intelligence is my lack of intelligence?" Doing it in terms that demonstrate that you are not even interested in addressing their arguments, but start from a position of "My mind is made up, please do not confuse me with facts" ~~ then yes, of course it is. ~M~ |
|
17 Oct 12 - 03:01 AM (#3421113) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle I like MGM. Very witty. very urbane. massively knowledgeable. I reckon his problem is . Some old journalist at some point said to him - Mike , what you gotta do is get people writing in, saying they disagree with you. that proves to the editor, there are some twonks out there that are reading your copy. I would suggest you all bear this explanation in mind, next time you read he's in favour of knocking on old ladies doors and running off, going in Chinese takeaways and asking hows the dog? rescinding ll of Mrs Thatcher's Jim'll Fix It Medals.... Beware! there is a certain impish humourist abroad in the land.... |
|
17 Oct 12 - 05:03 AM (#3421140) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket I don't know if they have murdered the fat convict yet, but if they have, we can perhaps let this thread lie. But for the record, let me answer the final point of the person posting above Al's rather succinct contribution... I don't have a view on people with full term tariffs using the courts to question their predicament. Mainly because I don't have a view on whether it means the judicial system is wrong when it is used by those I don't have time for. People don't get a full term tariff through some magical system, they get it through courts. Hence a court is the proper place to test it. If judgements could not be tested, that alone would strengthen my stance that capital punishment is not an option in decent society. And advocating it isn't an option in decent company. |
|
17 Oct 12 - 05:29 AM (#3421147) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Sorry, Mus; just can't see your logic. Where cap-pun obtains, how else do you think its adminstation is determined except thru the courts? As to whether it is a moral option in such circs is quite another question, not following from your premise as to the role of the courts at all. So your bits about "testing the judgment" and "decent company" are complete non seqs, mere confusions of the issue to which your conclusion is in no way related. I honestly don't see how one of your intelligence can allow himself to get so woolly and confused, deflected by such irrationality & emotion in his thinking on any topic. I wouldn't call Al's post "succinct" so much as irrelevant, kind as it is to me personally ~~ for which many thanks, Al; you too so far as that goes. When are you coming this way again? ~M~ |
|
18 Oct 12 - 03:46 AM (#3421810) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion See my last post on the Gay Marriage thread for more comment on Musket's confused approach to topics. ~M~ |
|
18 Oct 12 - 11:12 AM (#3422026) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Musket Ok, this website doesn't support pictorial documents so I will try and make it as easy and user friendly as I can; 1. That rather obnoxious person Raedwusomethingorother rattled on about the rights of full term tariff prisoners being allowed to use the courts to question their sentence. I put forward that as the courts put them there, the courts are the correct place to question and appeal. 2. Decent company is where nobody makes things awkward by saying how much they relish the thought of being allowed to murder people lawfully. 3. As capital punishment is illegal here, it follows that carrying it out would be murder. Just a play on words but technically accurate and is useful to reinforce a viewpoint. 4. If you don't understand where Al was coming from, it was a pity he wasted 3 mins of his life. 5. If you don't understand that, kindly stop mocking my academic background as grounds to question me when it is clear that I am flogging a dead horse when assuming you are capable of debate. 6. If you ever see me in a pub, please wear a badge saying who you are so I don't waste any of my time engaging you in conversation as you have shown that stringing big words together is a mental leap and a half away from expressing understanding. 7. Just think, if everybody was like you, there'd be no need for irony, satire or taking the piss, as it falls flat. 8. But on the plus side, there'd be someone to champion and defend every bigot, every advocate of state murder, every person who thinks those in prison for gun crime are "stitched up" Not that you may agree with them, but that you confuse right to opinion and free speech with the right to spew out their hate. If you will keep encouraging them, don't be upset when it gets you on peoples' shit list. |
|
18 Oct 12 - 12:39 PM (#3422084) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: MGM·Lion Yaawwwwwnnnnnnn zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz |
|
18 Oct 12 - 06:30 PM (#3422336) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: gnu Musket. When society kills a person because that person has been deemed a necessary deletion, it is not murder. It is execution, for just cause OR not and the "not" is not germain to the "debate" of the definition. There can be no debate of that fact, even tho you may rant to the heavens. MGM has tried over and over, to no avail, to simply assert that state (society) sanctioned execution is not murder. You say tomatoe and I say that's fuckin bullshit. BTW... did they ever decide to ice that piece of shit or is he still takin up space and resources that could be put to better use? Just had another home invasion by a criminal in my province. Lad in his 80s smacked with an axe. If the old lad cracked that fucker with an axe, it would not be murder, it would be self defense or revenge, technically speaking. |
|
18 Oct 12 - 08:44 PM (#3422398) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle 'necessary deletion' - death by drowning in Tip-Ex! Call yourself a gnu - not even a spiney ant eater would think up something as dastardly! |
|
18 Oct 12 - 08:48 PM (#3422399) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Bobert Once again: you don't teach the sanctity of life by taking it... B~ |
|
19 Oct 12 - 07:41 AM (#3422537) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Don(Wyziwyg)T ""I cannot help but observe that, in his condition, he is hardly a danger to society."" You think obesity prevents him from pulling a trigger? Don T. |
|
19 Oct 12 - 08:38 AM (#3422568) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle Not to mention he might, in a fit of homicidal mania, throw himself down on a see saw with a midget on the other end - catapulting his victim to a gory end. |
|
20 Oct 12 - 07:24 AM (#3422996) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Muppet, you've gone into boring territory. I have limited capacity for trolling trolls, unlike some, so this will likely be my last direct response to you. And you are nothing but a sneering, cretinous troll. Even when we agree, I note that you can't bear to acknowledge that. Then there's this from the Gay Marriage thread, "crude bricks". How thick you are, Muppet. Don't you recognise your own bricks? I'm only "lobbing" them back. Mea culpa, "he started it" is a very childish argument. But it's fun from time to time, for a short time. It palls quickly when, despite a veneer of intelligence, you realise just how limited your opponent is. You might have a PhD; sadly it obviously doesn't preclude abject stupidity being part of the mix. I'll give just one perfect example. Juxtapose "If you fsil to understand, dont expect me to dumb it down for you. And no, I cant be arsed to coreect the small keyboard and big thumbs on my new phone." and "I need a thesaurus and send it you for Xmas. There is a difference between disagreeing (I like beer, my mate hates the taste of it) and having views that are unacceptable to society's general conscience, (intolerance, advocating the death penalty in the 21st century, breaking the law, using the possessive apostrophe when indicating plural...)" So when I make a typographical error, it's a stick to beat to me with. But when you make a similar error, it's so minor a fault that everyone must dismiss it as beneath notice. Your stick is your opponent's speck of dust? I think that, more than anything, shows you up for what you are. I don't debate that anyone who loves debate would agree that I sometimes go beyond reasonable bounds. I'm also pretty sure they'd class you as inept & incapable. Alleged PhD notwithstanding. Goodbye. |
|
20 Oct 12 - 07:41 AM (#3423000) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: GUEST,Big Al Whittle You have gone beyond reasonable bounds calling him inept and incapable. (Doesn't inept mean incapable anyway?) behave yourself Mr Wulf. I knew your ancestor Beowulf and he was a superhero - unlike yourself! |
|
20 Oct 12 - 08:44 AM (#3423014) Subject: RE: BS: Too obese to execute From: Raedwulf Al, I am slightly sorry not to have directly & reasonably disagreed with your p-o-v. You'll obviously have realised that I do. But, be fair, my tacit admission was, implicitly, an implication that I know damn well I've thrown Muppet's bricks back in this thread which, by my own comments, puts me "beyond". And, whilst I'd love to claim Beo as an ancestor (who wouldn't!), I wouldn't and I certainly don't regard myself as a superhero. I just refuse to let some anonymous internet **** pretend he's superior to me on the basis of utterly shite arguments. If only he'd provide an argument that was an argument, instead of the feeble rubbish we get! I reckon Muppet sits anonymously behind his pint in the pub, when his missus let's him out. It's only on the internet that he talks in terms that he knows would see him carrying his teeth home in a paper bag in real life. R P.S. Deliberately not referring to a dictionary, I would define inept as clumsy, whilst incapable as, well, not capable. They're very similar, but not the same. To me, at least! |