America Will Execute Brit Today.

by Englishman 91 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  144thousand_and_one

  ThiChi,

  I wanted to end this boring thread, but since you continue to attempt to fabricate statements and implications, I'm going to expose you for the liar you are.

  First, here's my original statement:

  Two wrongs don't make a right, and I am embarrassed that our country has not only overwhelmingly embraced the death penalty, but has also elected a man who as Governor of Texas presided over more executions than any other governor in our history.

  Based on this statement, you responded as follows:

  You made the claim that Texas is somehow over killing the killers. You are just plain wrong. Your uninformed claims is what is really wasting space here. Please get your facts right....

  As anyone can clearly see, I've never made the claim that "Texas is somehow over killing the killers," nor have I ever implied/inferred such a claim. You have fabricated a statement, attributed it to me, and attacked it. You are the one who needs to get your facts straight, and refrain from the outright lies you've committed here.

  There's nothing implicit about my claim, it's very explicit. I am disgusted with the popular acceptance of the death penalty in this country. This was stated, not implied. Period. All this bullshit about implications, inferences, etc., will not extricate you from the hole you've dug. Admit when you're wrong, and move on. Your accusations are false, and, accordingly, any statements you've made, purporting to be fact, should be scrutinized carefully, as you have demonstrated a lack of veracity. Your performance here should be put on your resume when you apply for that elder job; they'll probably give you extra credit for being a liar.

  I have nothing further to add. I hope you enjoyed the news of the execution and have an idea; maybe you can contact the decedent's relatives and laugh at them to add to their pain.
• 

  ThiChi

  You still did not answer my question (agian). Why mention Texas at all then? You have no point? What does Texas and the DP have to do with your statement then? Your words then are just meaningless? Words mean things. If this is true, then you were just babbling...........

  " but has also elected a man who as Governor of Texas presided over more executions than any other governor in our history.""

  What does this mean? There is a resonable inference here....... Or are you pulling a 1975 WT thing here............

  Last post on this matter...

  LB: I saw a great bumper sticker that read: You can have my gun when you take Ted Kennedy’s car.

  Ouch......heheee
• 

  GWEEDO

  Thichi

  You stated that you feel the DP is not a deterrent. I refer you to the study I posted in this thread that shows Homicides did in fact increase when a moratorium was in place for the PD.

  Because you get rid of the DP and then homicides increase doesn't exactly mean there is a cause effect relationship. There are many other factors involved in the increase and decrease of crime rates...it's a complex phenomenon. I could show you countries where after getting rid of the DP there has been no change in homicide rates I'm certain....maybe even a decrease...I know I can go straight to Amnesty International's site, or hundreds of other sites that oppose the DP, and get some stats or studies to throw back at you that support the idea that the DP has no added deterrent value.

  I think it's very logically unsound to conclude that death penalty is a deterrent.. and yet a life behind bars isn't??? Makes no sense to me. I dont believe that the DP has any deterrent value above a life behind bars. I really see no reason to conclude that that would be the case.

  Also, what about murders who got life and then escaped and killed again? You can argue that if they were DP, they would not have created more victims after excaping. So the DP does lower crime. Something to think about.

  I'd say thats an issue more to do with security...of which the Dp has nothing to do with. No good reason for the death penalty in itself.

  The idea that we must have a death penalty because murderers might otherwise break out and kill again isn't as good an argument to me as: we must not have a DP because we might execute an innocent person.
• 

  Englishman

  Gweedo,

  Some might say that whether or not the DP has a deterrent effect is irrelevent.

  Others might just believe that the way that a country treats it's deviants is a measure of the emotional intelligence of it's law makers.

  Englishman.
• 

  ThiChi

  ""It is true that the capital punishment in itself is no method of salvation that will mean that the paradise is coming and that everyone will be kind to each other. And this is due to the fact that the evil in a society can not be wiped out using the death penalty or using any other sanction. No matter what the juridical laws that a country holds, heinous crimes will haunt society and spread fear as long as humankind walks the earth.
  In order for the trend of violence and murder to lessen, many factors have to cooperate and the death penalty is only one of these factors. If society is to develop in a good way and in order to see the criminal trend lessen we the citizens of society and the government have to focus and fight the following diseases in the body of society: unemployment, poor economical growth, political instability, social problems, racial- and cultural oppositions, alcohol- and drug abuse, an ineffective police force, a legal system that lacks the trust of the people, psychological illness, the ease to supply guns, insufficient child raising, destructive housing environment, poor home and school environment, the "entertainment violence" in movies.
  If the development in these areas would be for the better it would bring forth a more flourishing social climate as a whole, and thereby create the conditions needed to see the crime statistic begin their downward walk.
  The abolitionists can often say, "the death penalty does not help." It is not always easy to know what they mean by that. If the word "help" means that the death penalty is unable to stop the flow of future violent criminals and murderers, this is correct. They will always exist. The capital punishment can not remove the evil from society and it will not give us a blissful society.
  Here needs to be noted that the capital punishment first and foremost is not to lessen the most cruel criminality, but is intended to "help" by giving a just punishment and to maintain the respect and the dignity of the human life. The determining factor is thus not how much the crime rate drops by using the death penalty. The determining factor is that justice prevails and that the victims of crime receive the value and respect that they deserve. Yet it goes without saying that by using the death penalty the violent criminality will not be as extended as it is without the death penalty. Indeed some will be deterred from violent criminality because of the death penalty. Normally we humans avoid such things that threaten our lives. And it is also clearly understood that murderers and violent criminals who are executed are unable to commit new crimes.
  Every country has the experience of both mass-murderers and serial killers, but the death penalty puts a definite end to continuous murders, and many people have then been spared from a life-long suffering. Every time this occurs it means a triumph for life in the society. Unfortunately we will never know when it happens, or how many times a capital punishment puts an end to the early stages of the development of a serial killer. But every time a serial killer is stopped by the use of the death penalty, before the violence has spread, humanism and humanity wins a great victory.
  The cold facts are that if every country would introduce the capital punishment and consequently follow the law and execute heinous criminals, such as violent criminals and murderers, the most violent crimes on the earth would be considerably fewer, and we would have a somewhat nicer and safer world to live in.
  And one may wonder how many would lay sleepless at nights and cry the bitter tears of despair if the world inhabited fewer people who spread terror, destruction and deviltry among us by their acts of violence and murders?""
• 

  ThiChi

  ""Others might just believe that the way that a country treats it's deviants is a measure of the emotional intelligence of it's law makers.""

  Englishman:

  I do question the “emotional intelligence” of anyone who practices “cruel and unusual leniency” without regard for the respect of justice and the victims.
• 

  Englishman

  Thi Chi,

  I can recall when most of Europe practised the DP, in France they were BEHEADING murderers right up till 1977!

  Abolishing the DP is, to me, just a normal progress in Man's development.

  Look how we scorn the WT for it's advocacy of corporal punishment, yet only 25 years ago child smackers were admired for their tough stance on their kids. Now it's viewed with disgust.

  The same thing will definitely happen with CP, people will just grow away from it IMO. It's becoming morally indefensible, and I reckon it will go down the same road that all violent acts are going. It will soon become socially unacceptable in America too.

  Englishman.
• 

  Englishman

  Just seen a TV documentary about CP in the US.

  It stated that the most pro CP states are the original pro-slaving states. It also said that in Texas, no white person had been executed for the murder of a black person since the civil war.

  Can this be correct?

  Englishman.
• 

  ThiChi

  In a civilized country it is not the death penalty but the deeds of violent criminal and the murderer that should be viewed as barbaric. The death penalty –– rightly used by a developed legal system –– is somewhat the opposite of barbaric. It is a mark of civilization since it reveals justice and righteousness. Additionally it reinstates the respect and dignity of all victims of crime etc.
  It is not barbaric to remove a violent criminal or a murderer who has injured and killed fellow humans. It is not barbaric to make the earth a somewhat more safe, calm and just place. On the other hand it is barbaric to let the murderer spend a few years in prison and then give him freedom and the possibility to walk on the graves on his victims and maybe continue to terrify and torture people.

  Justice in itself is irreplaceable, good and always perfect. But when handled by humans it happens that mistakes are made. But because justice on occasion fails to fall on the right person must not mean that we abandon it. Since justice in some cases and some crimes is unable to give any alternative to the death penalty we must accept that the final justice - the death penalty –– has its chosen and determined place in the book of laws. A death penalty is just as irrevocable as the death of the victim of the crime. No one can therefore deny that the capital punishment means the fairest and highest punishment for the murderer.
  It becomes unacceptable if hundreds of violent criminals and murderers are to avoid the death penalty in order for no innocent person to accidentally be executed. It would mean that we for ever are forced to abandon justice for such criminals. And thinking of the victims it would also be to sacrifice the respect, the compassion and the inviolable worth of the human life on the altar. These sacrifices would pass the limit of tolerability with big steps.
• 

  ThiChi

  What a thread!