|
Post by rayozz on Feb 11, 2015 23:13:10 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 11, 2015 23:38:00 GMT -6
""The people who have experienced it up to the point of unconsciousness said it was a euphoric feeling," said Christian, a Republican from Oklahoma City. "If they're saying it's euphoric, I'd say it's more humane.""
You can't humanely deprive another person of life. It's a contradiction in terms.
|
|
|
Post by rayozz on Feb 12, 2015 0:16:24 GMT -6
""The people who have experienced it up to the point of unconsciousness said it was a euphoric feeling," said Christian, a Republican from Oklahoma City. "If they're saying it's euphoric, I'd say it's more humane."" You can't humanely deprive another person of life. It's a contradiction in terms. The article is not about whether execution is humane.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 12, 2015 1:28:21 GMT -6
""The people who have experienced it up to the point of unconsciousness said it was a euphoric feeling," said Christian, a Republican from Oklahoma City. "If they're saying it's euphoric, I'd say it's more humane."" You can't humanely deprive another person of life. It's a contradiction in terms. The article is not about whether execution is humane. The quote was.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 8:49:14 GMT -6
Humane, inflicting as little pain as possible.
Whether it be saving or ending a life.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 12, 2015 9:08:08 GMT -6
Humane, inflicting as little pain as possible. Whether it be saving or ending a life. That is not how it is defined. Humane is usually defined as having or showing compassion or benevolence. An execution is as malevolent as it gets.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 9:57:40 GMT -6
Humane, inflicting as little pain as possible. Whether it be saving or ending a life. That is not how it is defined. Humane is usually defined as having or showing compassion or benevolence. An execution is as malevolent as it gets. Whatever is necessary to protect should be done with as little pain as possible. It is not malevolent. The victims were treated to pain & suffering & malevolent not needed to protect anyone..only to harm.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 12, 2015 10:05:42 GMT -6
Whatever is necessary to protect should be done with as little pain as possible. It is not malevolent. You can prevent the pain by not killing him. That solves the problem, if his pain bothers you. The victims were treated to pain & suffering & malevolent not needed to protect anyone..only to harm. Murder has nothing to do with the victim's pain or suffering. Murder is still murder even if the victim consents to the murder. There are no benign executions, nor should there be. IF you're going to kill a man for what he's done, make a point of it. Do it with feeling. Make it righteous, not solemn. Otherwise, what's the point.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 11:00:08 GMT -6
Justice does make a point, some are attempting to desensitize them the (actual victims), while sensitizing the murderers " feelings" . making him/her the victim.
If justice is not about the actual victims pain/suffering/ loss & societies, then the same should apply towards the murderers family? Speaking of rightousness.
To add" I am not worried about the pain they suffer, the mental pain they suffer "fear" of execution only reminds me of the horror the victims mentally went thru for no rational or legal reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 11:22:07 GMT -6
I like the idea of this org thread link . And it is not about the whether execution is humane.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 11:26:54 GMT -6
Humane, inflicting as little pain as possible. Whether it be saving or ending a life. That is not how it is defined. Humane is usually defined as having or showing compassion or benevolence. . Adjective" Inflecting as little pain "as possible" . A humane killing.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 12, 2015 11:45:35 GMT -6
Adjective" Inflecting as little pain "as possible" . A humane killing. It isn't the protocol that's inhumane. It's the act itself. There is absolutely nothing humane in killing a human being, particularly when it's contrary to his wishes. Humane people simply don't kill. Period. The desuetude of capital punishment in the United States accrues from the squeamishness of its "supporters." Every problem with it has to do with the inability of capital punishment "proponents" to imbue it with any form of moral purpose. The death penalty is in the possession of incompetents.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 12:25:42 GMT -6
Adjective" Inflecting as little pain "as possible" . A humane killing. It isn't the protocol that's inhumane. It's the act itself. There is absolutely nothing humane in killing a human being, particularly when it's contrary to his wishes. Humane people simply don't kill. Period. The desuetude of capital punishment in the United States accrues from the squeamishness of its "supporters." Every problem with it has to do with the inability of capital punishment "proponents" to imbue it with any form of moral purpose. The death penalty is in the possession of incompetents. Humane people do kill. Moral purpose? One is a society that ("doubts") it's not right to impose a DP on individuals who commited vicious crimes agains't their fellow citizens, the horror of commiting murder will tend to erode.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 12, 2015 12:32:50 GMT -6
Humane people do kill. Moral purpose? One is a society that ("doubts") it's not right to impose a DP on individuals who commited vicious crimes agains't their fellow citizens, the horror of commiting murder will tend to erode. I'm trying to understand this statement. If people are horrified about murder, as you seem to suggest, then why the soft approach to capital punishment? Why execute only one in 250 who commit murder? Why not public hanging, or even public stoning, instead of the peevish method of execution we have now?
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 13:28:12 GMT -6
Humane people do kill. Moral purpose? One is a society that ("doubts") it's not right to impose a DP on individuals who commited vicious crimes agains't their fellow citizens, the horror of commiting murder will tend to erode. I'm trying to understand this statement. If people are horrified about murder, as you seem to suggest, then why the soft approach to capital punishment? Why execute only one in 250 who commit murder? Why not public hanging, or even public stoning, instead of the peevish method of execution we have now? People are not horrified or seem less & less horrified by illegal murder, desensitized. Do you really believe that would make it better with public hangings? Or desensitized us more? Killing has a place, a time, even a duty in this world sometimes. Fact is, those who are facing the DP do everything to get their sentence postponed or reduced to a long term prison sentence. In a way lifers do not. Shows they fear death more than life in prison... Why execute only one in 250? All based on feelings. You say are not included in justice. Feelings & theory are part of justice after all. For the one side atleast in court. The killer.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 12, 2015 14:02:40 GMT -6
People are not horrified or seem less & less horrified by illegal murder, desensitized. Attributable to racism. Do you really believe that would make it better with public hangings? Public hangings wouldn't cause public anger over murder. They would be the product of such anger. The Chinese aren't desensitized about murder. They know if a loved one is murdered, the state will descend upon the murderer like a ton of bricks. The death penalty there, and its active, unflinching use, accrues from their expectation of justice. Not so here. those who are facing the DP do everything to get their sentence postponed or reduced to a long term prison sentence. That is to be expected, and is exactly what the legal establishment wants. The death penalty states and the federal government spend fortunes making sure the condemned have all the due process guaranteed them by the federal constitution, and more. What they don't want is a repeat of the Gary Mark Gilmore case, which I find puzzling. If a condemned inmate wants to commit suicide, let him. In a way lifers do not. Shows they fear death more than life in prison... Why execute only one in 250? All based on feelings. You say are not included in justice. Feelings & theory are part of justice after all. For the one side atleast in court. The killer. Lifers aren't allowed to appeal their sentences. They would if they could. So you're saying people FEEL only one in 250 murderers merit condign punishment of their crimes. It's too bad the murdered don't enjoy the 14th Amendment's protection of equal protection under the law. If they did, 249 murderers out of 250 wouldn't be spared the retribution they deserve.
|
|
|
Post by ginger on Feb 12, 2015 14:24:40 GMT -6
It isn't the protocol that's inhumane. It's the act itself. There is absolutely nothing humane in killing a human being, particularly when it's contrary to his wishes. Humane people simply don't kill. Period. The desuetude of capital punishment in the United States accrues from the squeamishness of its "supporters." Every problem with it has to do with the inability of capital punishment "proponents" to imbue it with any form of moral purpose. The death penalty is in the possession of incompetents. Humane people do kill. Moral purpose? One is a society that ("doubts") it's not right to impose a DP on individuals who commited vicious crimes agains't their fellow citizens, the horror of commiting murder will tend to erode.
|
|
|
Post by ginger on Feb 12, 2015 14:26:47 GMT -6
Truer words were never spoken.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 15:03:12 GMT -6
People are not horrified or seem less & less horrified by illegal murder, desensitized. Attributable to racism. Do you really believe that would make it better with public hangings? Public hangings wouldn't cause public anger over murder. They would be the product of such anger. The Chinese aren't desensitized about murder. They know if a loved one is murdered, the state will descend upon the murderer like a ton of bricks. The death penalty there, and its active, unflinching use, accrues from their expectation of justice. Not so here. those who are facing the DP do everything to get their sentence postponed or reduced to a long term prison sentence. That is to be expected, and is exactly what the legal establishment wants. The death penalty states and the federal government spend fortunes making sure the condemned have all the due process guaranteed them by the federal constitution, and more. What they don't want is a repeat of the Gary Mark Gilmore case, which I find puzzling. If a condemned inmate wants to commit suicide, let him. In a way lifers do not. Shows they fear death more than life in prison... Why execute only one in 250? All based on feelings. You say are not included in justice. Feelings & theory are part of justice after all. For the one side atleast in court. The killer. Lifers aren't allowed to appeal their sentences. They would if they could. So you're saying people FEEL only one in 250 murderers merit condign punishment of their crimes. It's too bad the murdered don't enjoy the 14th Amendment's protection of equal protection under the law. If they did, 249 murderers out of 250 wouldn't be spared the retribution they deserve. Regarding your last quote" Yeah well the message I get is" the 14th amendment only protects your rights if your still alive. Can't bring them back as the ole stupid saying goes. To many Murderes are still alive by the 14th amendment of equal protection under the law. Murderers know this.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 12, 2015 15:58:23 GMT -6
That is not how it is defined. Humane is usually defined as having or showing compassion or benevolence. . Adjective" Inflecting as little pain "as possible" . A humane killing. We wouldn't think a serial murderer was more humane if he "changed his protocol" so as to kill his victims with less pain.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 16:29:13 GMT -6
Adjective" Inflecting as little pain "as possible" . A humane killing. We wouldn't think a serial murderer was more humane if he "changed his protocol" so as to kill his victims with less pain. There are more humane ways for a murderer to kill, even the law see's that. A bullet to the head does not get the DP. When the victim is raped, tortured , murdered & body cut up or buried while still alive would most likely does qualify for the DP. That is what some call the worse of the worse.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 12, 2015 17:14:52 GMT -6
There are more humane ways for a murderer to kill, even the law see's that. A bullet to the head does not get the DP. It should, if murder is truly wrong. When the victim is raped, tortured , murdered & body cut up or buried while still alive would most likely does qualify for the DP. That is what some call the worse of the worse. And those people would be wrong. Rape, torture, desecration of human remains -- these do not aggravate murder. One cannot increase or decrease the quality of a killing. Every victim is harmed by exactly the same amount.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 12, 2015 17:37:42 GMT -6
There are more humane ways for a murderer to kill, even the law see's that. A bullet to the head does not get the DP. It should, if murder is truly wrong. When the victim is raped, tortured , murdered & body cut up or buried while still alive would most likely does qualify for the DP. That is what some call the worse of the worse. And those people would be wrong. Rape, torture, desecration of human remains -- these do not aggravate murder. One cannot increase or decrease the quality of a killing. Every victim is harmed by exactly the same amount. If that was true why do all of us wish when we die from a natural death, we would go in our sleep or fast. or wish for euthanasia. Murder is murder but, no one should suffer thru the torture many of them had before they died. So, yes process of death can be increased or decreased, natural or not.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2015 1:51:09 GMT -6
We wouldn't think a serial murderer was more humane if he "changed his protocol" so as to kill his victims with less pain. There are more humane ways for a murderer to kill, even the law see's that. A bullet to the head does not get the DP. When the victim is raped, tortured , murdered & body cut up or buried while still alive would most likely does qualify for the DP. That is what some call the worse of the worse. Which cases are "the worst of the worst" is decided, not by how much suffering was involved, but by how creepy the murder is. If a gangster shoots someone in the stomach and they bleed out, that's a painful way to go. But not worthy of the dp. If, however, the murderer has a creepy ritual involving a clock, a countdown and a shot of sodium pentathol, that's "worst of the worst" (despite being the same protocol used by the state). Death penalty for that. Why? Because we can understand a gangster. He's just a thug making a living. But the other guy, with his morbid clock and macabre countdown, is beyond our understanding. He is a freak, and so gets the punishment reserved for the worst of the worst.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2015 8:56:08 GMT -6
[quote source="/post/625348/thread" timestamp="1423780153" author=" if however, the murderer has a creepy ritual involving a clock, a countdown and a shot of sodium pentathol, that's "worst of the worst" (despite being the same protocol used by the state). Death penalty for that. Why? Because we can understand a gangster. He's just a thug making a living. But the other guy, with his morbid clock and macabre countdown, is beyond our understanding. He is a freak, and so gets the punishment reserved for the worst of the worst. [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2015 9:12:26 GMT -6
Whitediamond's idea of entertainment: An antic man cavorting to a tune.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2015 9:35:41 GMT -6
Whitediamond's idea of entertainment: An antic man cavorting to a tune. Problem is Bernard, murderers do not look like this, most fit in as an average joe. Or like Bundy. Wasn't it John Wayne Gacy who even had a pic with a president? People are not sentenced to the DP for looking or acting like freaks. John Wayne Gacy was a mass murderer. I would place him in the class of the worse of the worse. This was a real freak. To add" No I do not relate to gangsters, the movie the Godfather did not change my view about gangsters. They were mass murderers too.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2015 9:46:50 GMT -6
Whitediamond's idea of entertainment: An antic man cavorting to a tune. Problem is Bernard, murderers do not look like this, most fit in as an average joe. Or like Bundy. Wasn't it John Wayne Gacy who even had a pic with a president? People are not sentenced to the DP for looking or acting like freaks. Tell me what your definition of "worst of the worst" is. If a murderer kills a woman with a swift blow to the head, but then goes on to rape her corpse, is that the worst of the worst, in your book?
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2015 9:57:32 GMT -6
Problem is Bernard, murderers do not look like this, most fit in as an average joe. Or like Bundy. Wasn't it John Wayne Gacy who even had a pic with a president? People are not sentenced to the DP for looking or acting like freaks. Tell me what your definition of "worst of the worst" is. If a murderer kills a woman with a swift blow to the head, but then goes on to rape her corpse, is that the worst of the worst, in your book? I already told you what the worse of the worse is agains't society. Keepimg a mass murderer is a danger inside or outside the prison. I will never believe a mass murderer can be rehabilitated, even Dahmer knew that himself & stated so. This scenario you gave me, should get Real LWOP, if he murder's yet again inside, thru breakout etc, should be elevated to the DP. He blew his second chance.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2015 10:09:01 GMT -6
Problem is Bernard, murderers do not look like this, most fit in as an average joe. Or like Bundy. Wasn't it John Wayne Gacy who even had a pic with a president? People are not sentenced to the DP for looking or acting like freaks. Tell me what your definition of "worst of the worst" is. If a murderer kills a woman with a swift blow to the head, but then goes on to rape her corpse, is that the worst of the worst, in your book? Want another example of who should qualify for the DP. ISIS. Mass murderers. Or should we try to capture them & place them in prisons for the rest of their natural lives? To show how civil we are? In reality the DP should always remain an option for the worse of the worse. Unlike Joe, I do not the think all murder's qualify for the DP. Not that simple. Nothing should or can be one size fits all, that's fantasy or stupidity, or even just revenge.
|
|